![]() Provide a formal and objective description of the legally significant facts in your research problem. Summarize for your reader how the relevant law applies to your significant facts. Then give a brief (usually no more than four or five sentences long) self-contained explanation of the reasons for your conclusion. Begin with your conclusion: yes, no, probably yes, etc., if the question can be answered that way. The brief answer should clearly and fully respond to the question presented. Always include the name of the jurisdiction involved, e.g., New York, the Second Circuit. Although questions are usually framed so that they can be answered yes or no (or probably yes or probably no), sometimes they cannot (such as “Under New York law, has a retailer made a binding offer when…?”). ![]() It is usually one sentence, and often begins: “Whether….” or “Does….” The question incorporates legally relevant facts as well as the rule involved. The question presented should be sufficiently narrow and should be objective. The subject of the memo is a question: How does the relevant law apply to the key facts of the research problem? Thus, the question presented is analogous to the issue or question presented in a case brief. Put the title of each subsequent section of your memo at the beginning of that section, in all caps, and centered. RE: Name of client, and a short description of the subject matter of the memorandum TO: Name of person who assigned the research project Therefore, you need to maintain an objective tone, and remember to address any counterarguments. You are not writing to persuade a court but to predict how a court would apply the law to the facts of your situation. One final but important reminder: an office memorandum is a predictive statement of the law. Remember to keep the needs and expectations of your audience (here, a legally trained reader) in mind. ![]() Therefore, as you write, keep asking yourself: will the reader be able to follow my analysis? Have I organized my analysis to track all the steps in the “CRRACC” paradigm (conclusion-rule statement-rule explanation-application-counterargument-conclusion)? If your organization plan skips any steps of your thought process (for example, if you move directly from a bare statement of the rule to an application to your facts, without first discussing in greater depth the cases from which the rule is derived), your reader will not be able to follow your analysis and ultimately will not find your work to be useful. Your reader may have a general familiarity with the law you are discussing but may not be familiar with specific cases (or, if applicable, statutory provisions) that you have found to be relevant to the analysis. You are writing this for the benefit of another lawyer who has asked you to address a specific question and expects an answer to that question. As the list of writer’s questions included here suggests, keeping the needs and expectations of your (possibly extended) audience in mind is a key component of drafting an effective office memorandum. At the same time, it bears emphasis that the reader for whom you prepare the memorandum may be only one of several attorneys who will consult the memo, particularly if the legal question becomes the subject of litigation. The choices you make will be informed by the nature and level of complexity of the legal question, and the preferences of your intended audience, including your reader’s expected level of familiarity with the underlying area of law under discussion. There is no single version of a memorandum that will serve all situations. Even within the suggested format that we offer here, it is permissible and often appropriate to make choices – on how to frame the legal question, on the level of detail to include in the facts section, on the organization and scope of the legal discussion. When in doubt, follow the conventions chosen by the office in which you are working. Some law offices adopt their own format for a memorandum which may differ in some respects from the examples we have provided. The suggested format for a law office memorandum, structure for a working draft, a sample memorandum, and an advanced sample memorandum exemplify a conventional structure, highlighting a specific legal question and its answer, followed by a recitation of legally significant facts – the facts upon which resolution of the legal question depends – and a discussion section that identifies the applicable legal rule, applies it to the facts of the case, and addresses likely counterarguments to the principal line of analysis.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |