21st Century Legal Writing – Kiss the IRAC Method Good-bye!

LEAD WITH YOUR CONCLUSION – what?? I liked the IRAC method of presenting written legal arguments. It made sense. And maybe in some passive-aggressive sort of way, I enjoyed holding out on the judge by presenting the conclusion at the end.  Like, AHA! Bet you wouldn’t have figured that one out on your own.

That actually may be true for some judges I’ve had the pleasure of crossing paths with, but all the more reason to do away with the conclusion-at-the-end-thing and jump on the sound-bite train: lead with your conclusion. Yes, friends, IRAC is dead, long live CRAC – Conclusion, rule, analysis, cases.

It might seem strange, but think about it: what is the goal of your motion?  To get the judge to rule in your favor.  If you want to sell something, you don’t bore customers to death by itemizing the manufacturer’s details. You just tell them straight up why they need what you’re selling. Details come later.

So are we now supposed to waste our well-trained legal minds on writing advertising copy?  Well, yes, says Steven D. Stark, Yale Law grad, writer, lawyer, consultant and national legal writing lecturer. He advocates consolidating your core legal theory into a good slogan. Start your pleading (yes, even a complaint), motion or brief with a solid introduction that states clearly what you want the judge to do and why.

This method not only gives the reader (aka the judge) the most important information first; it also helps you solidify your core concept and then enables you to easily link every fact or legal argument back to it. This keeps your writing focused, simple and free of unnecessary clutter (also a big no-no).

Here’s another great tip: don’t state your facts in chronological order. Can you imagine? Mr. Stark says there are only two groups of people who tell stories chronologically: six-year-olds (because that’s where they are developmentally) and lawyers (because we get brain-washed back into being six-year-olds). Present your most compelling facts first. If you don’t, they will get buried in the chronological story no one wants to read.

Our culture is one of over stimulation, and judges are no exception. They have way too much to read in a short period of time. Give yourself a the best chance to convince them you are right: grab them with your conclusion. Details come later.