The IRAC Model of Legal Reasoning

IRAC stands for Issue, Rule, Application (or Analysis), and Conclusion.  The IRAC model is used to help law students and lawyers systematically analyze legal problems and hypotheticals.  Even undergraduate law students find it useful both in analyzing problems, demonstrating their legal reasoning skills, and organizing answers to essay questions on exams.

Sometimes you may be assigned business problems with legal issues that need to be resolved.  On other occasions, you may be asked to assume the role of a judge who must decide a case.  For both types of problems, begin your analysis by reading the problem carefully to identify the specific legal questions that you will need to address in your answer.  These are called ISSUES and you need to articulate them as precisely as you can, using legal terminology accurately and appropriately. Most instructors will require you to state the issue as a question.

Next, you will need to identify and discuss the relevant legal doctrine, RULE, or case precedent that you believe provides the best guidance for “solving” the issue, i.e., for answering the question that you posed.  Sometimes, there may be more than one legal rule that is appropriate; if so, discuss all potentially applicable rules and indicate which you think is the best rule to follow in this instance and why.  Remember that legal analysis is like proving a math theorem – you need to show each and every step of your analysis.  Similarly, jumping from the issue to your answer doesn’t demonstrate your knowledge of the law, so make sure you include a thorough discussion of the governing rules in your answers.

Because the actual outcome of every case is tied to the specific facts in that case, it is a crucial part of your IRAC analysis to APPLY the legal rule you’ve selected to the facts presented in the scenario.  Show how the rule applies to these particular facts, and perhaps why other rules that might seem to apply do not because the facts underlying those rules can be distinguished from the pertinent facts here.  Your application of the legal rule to the facts should lead to your ultimate CONCLUSION for that issue.  Repeat this process for each issue that needs to be resolved.

Sample Contracts problem to illustrate IRAC
Alex verbally agreed to sell Sheri his used car for $3500 on Friday.  She agreed to pay him with a cashier’s check for the full amount, after which he would give her title to the car and his keys.  When Sheri arrived to finalize the transaction, Alex told her he had sold the car to Trevor for $3800 the day before.  If Sheri sues Alex for breach of contract, who will win?
ISSUE:  Is the verbal agreement between Alex and Sheri an enforceable contract?
RULE:  Sales of goods are governed by the Uniform Commercial Code.  The UCC’s Statute of Fraud provision requires that a contract for the sale of a good for more than $500 must be in writing to be enforceable.
APPLICATION:  Because a car is a “good,” this transaction is governed by the UCC instead of the common law.  To be enforceable by a court, a contract for the sale of a good for more than $500 must be in writing.  The agreement between Alex and Sheri was oral – there was no written document as required by the UCC’s Statute of Frauds provision.  This means that even though Alex broke his promise to sell his car to Sheri, she cannot enforce that agreement in court.
CONCLUSION:  If Sheri sues Alex for breach of contract, he will win because their agreement was not in writing, as required by the UCC Statute of Frauds.