Law School Discussion

Question for paralegals or legal researchers

swifty

  • ****
  • 1357
    • View Profile
    • LSAT Sucks
    • Email
Question for paralegals or legal researchers
« on: July 30, 2004, 10:15:36 PM »
When I took my business law course, we were given a a ton of homework
which consisted of hyopthetical problems, say jurisdiction, where can this
person sue?  I would get the long drawn out problem, and was to summarize the
issue that needed to be resolved.  I was using the IRAC method, I hope some of you
have heard of that. (Issue, Rule, Analyis, Conclusion)


Issue:  One or two sentences stating what the jist of the problem is.

Rule:  Write out the rules (law) pertinent to the case.  Again, one or
two sentences.

Analysis:  This is how you apply the rule, and justify your conclusion.  This
could be quite lengthy depending on the issue.  What I did, was state the laws,
explain how it applies to the issue.  Often I would write, "even though the law states
this....it really isn't fair because....."

This is where I got into trouble.  I tried to put a personal touch on the homework just as I did in any other class.  My first homework assignment came back, and he wrote "you are beeing too moral!"  Me?  Moral?  HA!  Basically he just should have said I don't care what you think, you mean nothing to me, I want the law discussed and I really don't need a undergrad telling me what "should be."

The conclusion is just a restatement of the what you found out during the analysis, again, only one or two sentences. 

Those of you that have done some legal research, was there a standard method you were taught such as IRAC.  And most importantly, did you try to offer your opinions, like I did, or did your attorney not really care as long as you still did manage to make a proper analysis.  I am afraid I am going to be told that it depends on the lawyer, but I would really want to know what would likely happen to me if I used my own opinions in the analysis working in the real world.  I would guess? that lexy might say it depends on the lawyer, but she does it all the time and the attorney doesn't care?  What about you others, have you been chastised for offering you opinion of what should be, even though you did address the law?
I'm just curious how lawyers deal with this type of stuff.  Obviously the best way to go is to leave out my opinion, but wouldn't I want to make the lawyer a little more for lack of a better word "happier" if I personalized the research?  Anybody think you should only discuss the law, never offer you own opinion, and submit essentially what my professor wanted?

Your answers will be quite interesting to me I would think. 

Thanks!!!