a male human wrote:Is an issue statement inherently "wrong" just because the BLL does not mirror it? What if you started your rule statement with "A spouse has rights in half of CP and all of his SP. CP is ... and SP is ..." and made the issue "H has rights..." -- those statements mirror each other.
Or is it that the issue must be legally specific?
And to mirror AntiHuman (who is also my username antipode):
- What is different about PTs? PTs are pretty much a wild card. Your task may be like an essay with multi-element tests where you can use "whether"-type issue statements (the easiest kind of PT, e.g., Snyder v. Regents). Or you may be asked to write a persuasive brief with argumentative headings, not issue statements.
- What about those pesky cases that need to be analogized/distinguished? I tend to mash that part in at the end when I realize I haven't analogized/distinguished any cases. Should they be separated?
As far as the Issue/Rule mirroring:
1. I am sure you can do it without mirroring, but by keeping the concept of mirroring in your mind, it will force you to focus.
That is the benefit.
So, the issue statement will not "inherently" be wrong if the rule does not mirror it.
But, there is an increased chance that you will craft the issue as a correct legal issue if it links up grammatically with the rule that solves IT.
That's the benefit.
You will hopefully always be using the correct RULE, so your Issue better link up with that rule!
Mirroring-- is just a way to prove it.
Probably not a "whether" issue unless the task is analysis based.
You'll know if a IRAC and whether statements are needed.
However: Here are some PT tips:
1. There will always be an organizing principal. Find it.
It will be an element list of a law, or a list of your clients wants/needs, or who knows..
Just find it.
2. Make it look professional. I know, sounds silly. But it is true.
Form and delivery. Headings! bold, clear, solid form.
3. USE THAT FILE !
And by use, I mean: As much as possible, in BOLD.
So, law, cases, names of people interviewed, WHATEVER....
Just USE IT !
I would do what I had to do, and then just CRAM the info in there. IN BOLD so that the grader SEES it.
The analysis can be weak.. as little as "... In Walker v. Long Beach the court addressed the issue.
Thats it. Just cram it in there if you run out of time.
SHOW THE GRADER you saw the FULL FILE and considered everything.
Not all portions will have the same value or weight in the analysis, but you need to SHOW you saw them.
I had some seriously ridiculous uses, but at least I GOT THEM IN THERE !
1. Find that organizing element. Live by it.
2. Make it LOOK professional
3. CROW BAR in everything you can.
As far as analyzing: If analyzing is the task, the Whether statements will be useful as always.
When in doubt, IRAC and do what we have talked about.