3. Application - "John punched Mark in the face when Mark wasn't looking, breaking his nose. Mark never consented to this action, and, even if he had, the act was unlawful, mitigating any consent. The act was not privileged, because it did not take place in a context, such as a boxing ring, where some actions are permitted." All you need to do here is apply the facts to the rule in order to buttress your conclusion.
I went to an exam workshop and they told us we should write our exams in IRAC format. I'm a little confused as to what kind of wording and format we are supposed to use.This is what I gather about it. I will use a contracts hypothetical. Please tell me if I am getting this.Issue - Here I would say something like "Sam would sue John to enforce the promise because there was consideration."Then in the next sentence, I would discuss:Rule - "Under consideration, there must be a bargain by both parties and either a detriment to the promisee or a benefit to the promisor."Analysis - Go through and apply the test to the particular facts and argue for both Sam and John.Conclusion - Here, would I say "the likely result would be so and so" or what??Is this the correct format for how to answer an exam essay question? If not, what is??Thanks for any help!
Page created in 0.493 seconds with 18 queries.