Some professors may not want to see this language – the question is if. they get the same result, for example, with other words « Did » or « Can ». Don`t fixate on the tongue. Follow your teacher`s instructions and find that in both cases you will get the same result: the identification of the legal problem. RAIC stands for the « Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion » structure of legal analysis. An effective essay follows a form of RAIC structure in which it is organized around a « problem, » a « rule, » an « application, » and a « conclusion » for each individual problem and sub-problem identified as a legal problem. Another common mistake is to close something without having a basis for opinion. In other words, students will recognize the problem, specify a rule, and then formulate a conclusion without performing the analysis. Make sure that every position you take has a solid foundation in the analysis. Remember that the position you take is always whether the rule applies or not. « From the analysis, you come to a conclusion as to whether the rule applies to the facts. » The RARACC is an elaborate form of RAIC: conclusion, rule, proof of rule, application, counter-argument, conclusion. The RR reminds you to state the relevant legal rule as you have synthesized it from sources of legal authority (i.e., constitutions, statutes, by-laws and decision-making or customary law), and then back up that rule statement with an organized explanation and discussion of the legal authority on which the rule statement is based (i.e., rule proof). The CC reminds you to make important counter-arguments, i.e.: Contrary approaches to how you synthesized the rule or applied it to your facts before formulating your conclusion.

The RAIC triad emphasizes analysis using facts, problem and rule as building blocks. Analysis is the end product and primary focus of the RAIC triad, but the role that facts play in shaping analysis is highlighted. The RAIC is a good model for first-year law students. However, when printing the exam, many students omit the most important part of the equation – analysis. To illustrate the importance of analysis, I have modified the traditional model in what I call the RAIC triad. RAIC (Issue, Rule, Analysis and Conclusion) is the cornerstone of legal analysis. This is the process by which all lawyers think about all legal issues. The beauty of the RAIC is that it allows you to reduce the complexity of the law to a simple equation. Identify and indicate the legal conclusion that the court should reach, This analysis shows how careful you need to be about the wording of a rule. The words « impossible » mean that a remote possibility of being able to conclude the contract means that the rule is not applicable.

The biggest mistake people make when writing exams is recognizing the problem and simply reciting the rule without doing the analysis. Most professors know that you can consult the law, but they want to check if you can apply the law to a specific set of circumstances. Analysis is the most important element of the RAIC, because it is where the real reflection takes place. « Weil » is the most important word in writing the analysis. Using the word « because » forces you to make the connection between the rule and the facts. You will find that you can also use the words « asâ » and « since », they perform the same function as « because ». Even if something like entering seems self-evident, the fact that the defendant actually crossed the threshold must be indicated for the legal analysis to be complete. While using the RAIC does not guarantee an « A » from the professor, it is extremely helpful in organizing a response.

And while this isn`t the only way to structure an answer, it helps ensure that all bases are covered. So until you reach the level of mental and written fluency where you can weave rules and facts into a seamless network and transition between thoughts without losing your substance or reader, I highly recommend relying on some form of RAIC to stay focused. While the RAIC never covers a lack of knowledge or replaces a lack of analysis, you can use it as a tool to organize your thinking and writing. Think of it as a support scaffolding (or drive wheels) to make sure the necessary steps are followed. Once the process becomes instinctive, the props can be thrown away and you can weave the rule and facts together. But by then, you`ll have something you can count on to guide you through the process. RAIC stands for Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion. These words represent the steps of the most commonly accepted way of organizing a written legal analysis: first, articulate an important legal question or question; Next, indicate and explain the relevant legislation. Then, apply the rule to your facts; Finally, finish by explicitly answering the question or commenting on the topic. The RAIC is the most popular form of organization because it is usually the one that makes it easier for the reader to follow your analysis. Following the RAIC structure provides a framework around which you can organize your writing, making your discussion easier to write (and read). To reiterate, as a legal writer, you will be presented with a set of facts and will be asked to answer legal questions about them with a forward-looking or persuasive voice (unless your job involves drafting a law, will, or agreement that requires a different set of drafting, analytical, and planning skills).

beyond the scope of this discussion). As a law student, you are sometimes asked to write something that deals with a narrow topic (such as a short memo); Sometimes you will be asked to identify legal issues you can and resolve them (such as an answer to a certain type of exam question). More important legal issues can usually be broken down into a series of smaller questions, so you can divide each sub-question one by one, do « RAIC », dispose of it, and then devote yourself fully to the next sub-question. When you take sub-questions apart, you should define and organize them in a way that covers all relevant legal rules and allows the reader to follow them easily. A good legal analysis of a set of facts is usually structured as a series of RAIC entities (or CRRACC). The trap for the unwary is to stop at the rule. Although the rule is the law, the art of the lawyer lies in the analysis. The legal problem would not exist unless something happened. Note: Repeat the process for each identified issue – each issue forms the basis of a separate RAIC analysis.

The fraud status is unlikely to apply in these circumstances and the oral contract is not invalid, even if it was not concluded within one year. This important area is really relatively simple. For each relevant fact, you must ask yourself whether the fact helps to prove or disprove the rule. If a rule requires a certain circumstance to be present for the rule to apply, the absence of that circumstance will help you conclude that the rule does not apply. For example, all contracts for the sale of goods over $500 must be in writing. Therefore, when analyzing a contract for the sale of goods, you apply the presence or absence of two facts – the value of the property and whether there is a written contract – to see if the rule applies. Element 6) Theft of $5,000 is a crime in all states. 5. Patricia tries to sue Daniel a second time in the state court system for the same money he owes her. The triad is in fact a simple flowchart where the facts can be concluded. Without further evidence, the facts do not seem to indicate Peter`s intent to sue Doug in tort.

Finally, try to remember that the structure of the RAIC is a guideline and that all comments in this document are also guidelines. They exist to help you argue in a more orderly way and to allow this reasoning to be as understandable and accessible to your reader as possible. If you feel that applying any of these guidelines would create confusion in your letter, do not apply them; Sometimes it may be better to modify the proposed structure slightly. Your goal is to argue deeply and well-organized and write in a way that clearly conveys your argument.