Curious how to save some time using the IRAC method?
Today I provide one of the several variations of IRAC called mini IRAC, a time saving tip
on how to use headers, and an example based on the tort dealing with damage caused by cattle.
Hi, this is Professor Beau Baez.
One problem for many law students is having enough time to complete a timed essay exam.
This is because the IRAC method—Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion—
takes time to write down.
Inward, outward, upward!
Inward transformations, that help you make outward changes, to propel you upward!
The IRAC method is a powerful tool on an essay exam because it forces you, issue by issue,
to fully explore the most important aspects of what you need to cover.
Ideally, you would follow the nested-IRAC method, which I discuss on another video.
But given exam time constraints, you might want to consider the Mini IRAC method.
This approach is similar to nested IRAC, but uses a short cut to shave a few minutes on
a timed law school essay exam.
First, let me explain how mini IRAC works and then I will provide you with an example
based on the tort for keepers of cattle.
The I stands for issue, and normally you would use a sentence to state the issue.
But to save some time you can use a header as a substitute for the sentence.
After that, you continue with rule, application, and conclusion.
Sometimes you'll hear people call this method IRAC, using RACs R-A-C-S for each element.
Let’s move to a short question and answer using the mini IRAC method.
John owns several cows on a small farm.
One day, one of the cows gets through a broken fence, which recently was damaged in a storm.
The cow enters the land owned by Maria, eating many of her rare and expensive flowers.
It is clear that John acted reasonably in maintaining the fence.
The first paragraph is the topic paragraph, which tells the reader
what you are about to discuss.
The issue is whether John is liable to Maria for strict liability when his cow ate her
expensive flowers.
Keepers of cattle are strictly liable when four elements are established: trespassing
cattle, actual cause, proximate cause, and damages.
Maria will prevail in her suit against John.
The next section, rather than starting with a sentence, uses a header
that provides the issue.
Trespassing Cattle When cattle trespass, the owner of the cattle
is strictly liable for all damage they cause.
John’s cow left his farm, entered the land owned by Maria, and ate some expensive flowers.
Even though John acted reasonably in maintaining his fence, that is irrelevant under this tort.
John is strictly liable because his cow caused damage.
The next section deals with actual cause.
Actual Cause A person is the actual cause of the injury
when the but for test is satisfied.
Here, but for John’s cow entering Maria’s land, her flowers would not have been eaten.
John is the actual cause of Maria’s harm.
Next, we move to proximate cause.
Proximate Cause The harm must be the foreseeable consequence
of Defendant’s action.
It is foreseeable that a trespassing cow will eat vegetation, including Maria’s flowers.
The proximate cause element is met.
Harm Harm is measured by damage done to a person
or property.
When John’s cow ate the expensive flowers, Maria’s property was harmed.
Maria easily establishes the harm element.
Because Maria can prove all four elements, she will prevail in a lawsuit against John.
Now one final bit of advice.
If you have time to write out the issue statement in a sentence, that’s better.
But when you don’t have much time, this approach ensures that you get to what matters:
the rule and application sections.
New videos every other Wednesday, so make sure to hit the subscribe and bell buttons so you can become
a better student and a better lawyer.