How are Lawyers Taught to Reason?
Well, an interesting question! I guess it deserves an interesting answer. The answer is I-R-A-C. So now you want to know what in heaven's name that is all about?
OK, let's leave it up to Professor Andrews and the following excerpt from my book, Disbarment.
"I'm sure some of you are familiar with the mnemonic device, I-R-A-C," the professor's voice broke through with a show of mirth, and I might add for all you spelling buffs, that the first letter of mnemonic is an "m." "This device stands for Issue, Rule, Analysis, and Conclusion. As we study different cases, I will use it as a guide toward analyzing a case or problem. It will be a big help. " The gray-haired lecturer picked up a typewritten sheet from his desk and blared with a show of glee, "What I am about to tell you is a gem! Feed this into your mental computer," he said as the corners of his mouth further broadened in a smile. "Always analyze your facts -- sift them, weave them, work them, look for the subtleties, and make damn sure you get your analysis in your answer." His voice ended still bellowing, using the paper in his hand as a banner which he flagged in a sweeping motion.
Now bringing the paper to eye level, he said, "Listen to these facts: A man named Anderson, with the intent of stealing, walks into a grocery store at night, pulls out a gun, forces the proprietor to give him $49.00 in the cash register, and then flees. What common law crimes and what state crimes did Anderson commit, applying I-R-A-C?" The professor looked up. "I shall now supply you the answer." He began to read: "(ISSUE) Has Anderson committed common law burglary, larceny, robbery and/or assault under the facts of the case? (RULE) The elements of the burglary at common law involved the act of breaking and entering another's dwelling at night with the criminal intent to commit a felony in the dwelling. (APPLICATION) Applied to the facts of the case, common law burglary could not be established. Entry by breaking must involve force or other improper means and neither is present. Also the 'dwelling' at common law generally required that some part of the structure be customarily used for sleeping. (CONCLUSION)Since the 'breaking' element and the 'dwelling' element are not present, Anderson has not committed common law burglary. (Comment: Most states have expanded the crime of burglary. The breaking requirement has been abolished by many states and now makes any structure with walls and a roof subject to burglary. Thus, under most state laws, Anderson's acts would be sufficient to establish the crime of burglary.) (RULE) The elements of larceny at common law involved the taking and carrying away of another's property with criminal intent or knowledge and the specific intent to deprive the victim of his property permanently. (APPLICATION) Clearly, Anderson's act of taking the $49.00 with the intent to steal the property would constitute common law larceny, a felony in the early stages of the common law. (Comment: In most states larceny is only a felony if the property is worth more than a specified amount. $50.00 is a common dividing line in many states, and therefore larceny for $49.00 would be a misdemeanor, denominated 'petty larceny' in most states). (RULE) The elements of robbery at common law included "take ten minutes." Practically in unison, the class arose with an air of weariness.
-JS
