Top Law Schools

Where is a good site to obtain sample IRAC questions, exams and answers. Would like to practice as much as possible

Supreme Court opinions.

I am assuming you are a 0L?

Supreme Court opinions, or most formal legal writing, are not great exams of IRAC as used on an exam. If you write like even the best Supreme Court justices, you will have a terrible exam.

I've said this elsewhere, but I don't see IRAC as an actual methodology itself. It's like saying that a good essay has an introduction, a main body and conclusion. It's just anatomy.

Check out TLS's links to practice exams. Start by reviewing what professors generally think good law student answers.

ALSO: get "Planet Law School" -- it is super important for debunking what you think law school is like, and what you actually need to do. But if you are a 0L and are talking this early about doing practice exams, I think you are clearly on the right path.

you need this for exams or legal writing?

IRAC is TTT for exams

Nova wrote:you need this for exams or legal writing?

IRAC is TTT for exams

Eh... Not really. Think - when you roll through an exam, you're spotting the issue, stating the rule that applies (or two rules if there's a competing rule), and then analyzing the facts with the rule to see how well it fits. The Conclusion part is most often a waste, but I think the IRA(C) method is fairly intuitive.

stating the issue is unnecessary. the application of the rule is the issue

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ftw

IRAC is TTT.

IRAC is a way to teach shitty writers to not be so damn shitty. A decent writer will look at IRAC, and be like, "No shit. That only makes sense."

It's like baking a cake.

First, I have my issue. I need to bake a cake.

Second. I find all the ingredients and directions necessary to make the cake. Thus, my rules.

Third, I follow the fucking directions and apply my real life flour, eggs, etc. in the order the directions tell me. Thus, my application.

Fourth, I have a fucking cake. Thus, my conclusion.

Nova wrote:stating the issue is unnecessary. the application of the rule is the issue

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ftw

I generally agree, but for issue spotters I generally put the broad issue as a heading. In part I do this to remind myself what I'm suppose to cover before I start my RA.

e.g. read question and type:

Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4

Then go back and use those as headers for RA.

^ Solid Advice.

I find professors like it when you separate each issue with its own header. Especially in a convoluted class like ConLaw.

SOME POWER LAWYERS IN HERE!

CounselorNebby wrote:^ Solid Advice.

I find professors like it when you separate each issue with its own header. Especially in a convoluted class like ConLaw.

HAS FOUR GRADES!

7sagelarry wrote:I am assuming you are a 0L?

Supreme Court opinions, or most formal legal writing, are not great exams of IRAC as used on an exam. If you write like even the best Supreme Court justices, you will have a terrible exam.

I've said this elsewhere, but I don't see IRAC as an actual methodology itself. It's like saying that a good essay has an introduction, a main body and conclusion. It's just anatomy.

Check out TLS's links to practice exams. Start by reviewing what professors generally think good law student answers.

ALSO: get "Planet Law School" -- it is super important for debunking what you think law school is like, and what you actually need to do. But if you are a 0L and are talking this early about doing practice exams, I think you are clearly on the right path.

Planet Law School is an overgrown overwrought polemic desperately in need of an editor and preys on 0L fears. You do not need to read it to do well in law school.

Hipster but Athletic wrote:

CounselorNebby wrote:^ Solid Advice.

I find professors like it when you separate each issue with its own header. Especially in a convoluted class like ConLaw.

HAS FOUR GRADES!

TBF it's five now.

Edit: Another tip. If you know your exam is going to be an essay/IRAC exam, you can save yourself some time on the exam while studying for the exam by pre-writing the rule development (rule/rule explanation/case illustration/etc.) portion. Obviously only useful if the exam allows you to bring notes. For instance, in ConLaw you'll probably cover some affirmative powers of Congress and limits. Each of these issues have a contemporary set of precedent you'll cover in class. So pre-writing the rule development for all the affirmative powers and limits (only the ones covered in class) will ensure all your bases are covered and save time during the exam.

Here's a tip: Do what your professor asks you for. Some will say that all issues fairly raised will get you points. Some favor well reasoned, efficient analysis. Some will structure the exam questions as "write a memo", others will ask you to write a bench brief (mostly one sided, give some deference to opposing viewpoints), and others summary judgment briefs in favor of one side. Briefs should almost assuredly be written in some form conclusion-rule-app-conclusion formation, memos IRAC, and issue spotters consolidated IRAC. Sometimes, they will even tell you that bullet points are fine. CounselorNebby is a remarkable dickwad.

Anyone arguing that IRAC is for noobs is actually an idiot. It's a form that is taught in law school not because it teaches the illiterate to write, but because quality in legal writing is very much determined by adherence to norms. It's also an efficient means of writing that provides predictability and easy parsing of important phrases. Separating law from fact allows subsequent lawyers to quote far more easily and allows for more concrete precedent.

Hey. My last comment was actual advice.