15: Legal Memos - Final Draft

Last updated
Save as PDF

Page ID: 230480

Beth R. Pless, J.D. (Northeast Wisconsin Technical College)
Santa Ana College

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\(\newcommand{\avec}{\mathbf a}\) \(\newcommand{\bvec}{\mathbf b}\) \(\newcommand{\cvec}{\mathbf c}\) \(\newcommand{\dvec}{\mathbf d}\) \(\newcommand{\dtil}{\widetilde{\mathbf d}}\) \(\newcommand{\evec}{\mathbf e}\) \(\newcommand{\fvec}{\mathbf f}\) \(\newcommand{\nvec}{\mathbf n}\) \(\newcommand{\pvec}{\mathbf p}\) \(\newcommand{\qvec}{\mathbf q}\) \(\newcommand{\svec}{\mathbf s}\) \(\newcommand{\tvec}{\mathbf t}\) \(\newcommand{\uvec}{\mathbf u}\) \(\newcommand{\vvec}{\mathbf v}\) \(\newcommand{\wvec}{\mathbf w}\) \(\newcommand{\xvec}{\mathbf x}\) \(\newcommand{\yvec}{\mathbf y}\) \(\newcommand{\zvec}{\mathbf z}\) \(\newcommand{\rvec}{\mathbf r}\) \(\newcommand{\mvec}{\mathbf m}\) \(\newcommand{\zerovec}{\mathbf 0}\) \(\newcommand{\onevec}{\mathbf 1}\) \(\newcommand{\real}{\mathbb R}\) \(\newcommand{\twovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\ctwovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\threevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cthreevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\mattwo}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{rr}#1 \amp #2 \\ #3 \amp #4 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\laspan}[1]{\text{Span}\{#1\}}\) \(\newcommand{\bcal}{\cal B}\) \(\newcommand{\ccal}{\cal C}\) \(\newcommand{\scal}{\cal S}\) \(\newcommand{\wcal}{\cal W}\) \(\newcommand{\ecal}{\cal E}\) \(\newcommand{\coords}[2]{\left\{#1\right\}_{#2}}\) \(\newcommand{\gray}[1]{\color{gray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\lgray}[1]{\color{lightgray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\rank}{\operatorname{rank}}\) \(\newcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\col}{\text{Col}}\) \(\renewcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\nul}{\text{Nul}}\) \(\newcommand{\var}{\text{Var}}\) \(\newcommand{\corr}{\text{corr}}\) \(\newcommand{\len}[1]{\left|#1\right|}\) \(\newcommand{\bbar}{\overline{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bhat}{\widehat{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bperp}{\bvec^\perp}\) \(\newcommand{\xhat}{\widehat{\xvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\vhat}{\widehat{\vvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\uhat}{\widehat{\uvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\what}{\widehat{\wvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\Sighat}{\widehat{\Sigma}}\) \(\newcommand{\lt}{<}\) \(\newcommand{\gt}{>}\) \(\newcommand{\amp}{&}\) \(\definecolor{fillinmathshade}{gray}{0.9}\)

Brief Answers, Conclusion, and the Final Draft

In this chapter, we are going to explore what goes into writing the last two parts of your legal research memo – the Brief Answers section and the Conclusion. Once you have written those, you are ready to finalize it! This chapter contains some suggested steps and, at the end, a checklist for making your final draft the best it can be.

REVIEW AND REVISE WHAT YOU’VE WRITTEN SO FAR

Before you start drafting the Brief Answers section and the introductory paragraph, proofread, edit and revise the existing sections of your memo to make sure they look exactly the way you want them to look. Here are some suggested steps for this process:

Step 1: Check the existing sections of your legal memo for accuracy and completeness

Revision is an important part of excellent legal writing. Review each section of your legal memo to make sure what you wrote accurately reflects your legal synthesis and analysis. Some common errors to avoid in each component:

Questions Presented

☹ writing the legal standard too broadly (is someone liable, guilty, responsible, etc.) rather than focusing on the word or phrase being interpreted and applied.

☹ failing to include a list of legally significant client facts related to the legal standard.

☹ including facts in the Questions Presented section that are not also included in the Facts section.

Facts

☹ omitting legally significant facts or over-summarizing and leaving out small, but important, details.

☹ omitting contextual facts that help the reader understand what happened to the parties involved in the client’s legal matter.

☹ failing to use “signal” words to let the reader know which facts are disputed or subject to more than one reasonable interpretation.

☹ including legal conclusions (don’t answer the question in the legal standard or make a statement that the legal standard’s requirements were met or not met).

Discussion

☹ failing to use subheadings/subtitles that match each Question Presented being discussed.

☹ failing to include all of the IRAC components, in the correct order, for each Question Presented being discussed (review the chapters regarding IRAC for more detail).

☹ failing to include a complete and detailed counter-analysis as necessary after your IRAC analysis of each Question Presented (review the chapter regarding the Discussion section).

THE BRIEF AnswerS SECTION

The Brief Answers section goes right after the Questions Presented section. The purpose, of course, is to tell the reader how you answered each Question Presented, with a brief summary as to why you answered it that way. Although it seems logical to draft the Brief Answers right after you draft the Questions Presented, it’s actually easier to draft them after you’ve drafted your Discussion sections. Think of the Brief Answers as a synopsis of what your detailed analysis contained in your Discussion sections. Any writer will tell you it’s easier – and more logical – to write a synopsis of a document after you’ve written the actual document.

Once you’ve got the other sections of your research memo finalized, writing the Brief Answers section is relatively easy. Here are the steps:

Step 1: Copy and paste the legal standard from your Questions Presented into the Brief Answers section.

After you title the Brief Answers section, this really is the next step! Then make sure that the main numbering system of the Brief Answers matches the main numbering system of the Questions Presented.

Step 2: Add one of the following to the beginning of each Answer: “Yes.” “Probably yes.” “No.” “Probably No.”

How did you answer each Question Presented? Be decisive. "Maybe" is not helpful. While "Probably Yes" and "Probably No" can be helpful, they should be reserved for truly uncertain situations and not used where the answers are clear. There are no guarantees in the law, so it goes without saying that a "Yes" or "No" include the consideration that the answer is subject to the inherent uncertainties of human institutions and behavior.

Step 3: Revise the grammar and punctuation in each Brief Answer to a statement.

You wrote your Question Presented as a question. The Brief Answer needs to be a statement. That means you’ll need to change some words or word order and change the final punctuation from a question mark to a period. Here is what our Brief Answer would look like so far:

BRIEF Answer

Yes. The People will likely be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Wonka “willfully and maliciously” set fire to the Chocolate Factory.

Step 4: Add a brief summary of the legal authorities and legally significant facts that support each Answer.

Review the Rule and Application components of the Discussion section in which you analyzed the Question Presented related to the Answer. Then, generally summarize, at a high level, what the legal authorities say about the legal standard. After that, write one to two sentences about the most important legally significant client facts that support your Answer. Finish with a concluding sentence. Here is what the final draft of our Answers would look like:

Example Answers

AnswerS

Yes. The People will likely be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Wonka “willfully and maliciously” set fire to the Chocolate Factory because California law does not require any showing of motive or intent to cause a fire.

Notice that there are no citations contained in the Brief Answers. It would be fine to cite the arson statute if you choose; if you do, make sure to use complete and proper Bluebook citation form!

Writing the Conclusion

At this point, your legal research memo begins with the Facts and then dives into the Questions Presented. It ends with the Conclusion. The Conclusion should match the substance of the Brief Answers. The Conclusion should follow from the Discussion--the reader will not be surprised by conclusion because it is consistent with and flows from the reasons you explained in the Discussion section. The Conclusion should be brief: no more than two sentences!

Here’s how the Conclusion might look:

Example Conclusion

The People will be able to prove Wonka willfully and maliciously set the fire to the Chocolate Factory because of the witness testimony and the California precedents that do not require a showing of specific intent to commit arson to fine someone guility under California Penal Code section 451.

REVIEW, REVISE, AND FINALIZE YOUR MEMO

The final draft of your legal research memo should reflect not only your legal and factual analysis, but also your professionalism as a writer. Don’t let things like improper citation form, errors in writing mechanics (including grammar, punctuation, capitalization), or spelling errors ruin an otherwise great memo! Run spell-checker – slowly and carefully! Then put the memo aside for a while (at least an hour); after that, run “dumb-checker” – consider slowly and carefully reading your memo out loud.

Some additional items for your revision checklist:

Make sure you have all of the required sections, in the correct order; label only those sections that are required to be labeled (Questions Presented, Answers, Facts, Discussion)
Make sure your IRAC analyses are complete with the IRAC components in the correct order
Make sure your memo is internally consistent across all components
- Do you have the same number of Questions Presented, Answers, and IRAC analysis sections?
- Is there a one-for-one correlation between each Question Presented, Answer, and IRAC analysis Section (that is, do Question Presented 1, Answer 1, and IRAC 1 all address the same legal standard)?
- Is the content of your Questions Presented, Answers and Discussion consistent?
- Are all the facts contained in your Questions Presented and Discussion section also contained in the Facts section?
- Are the verb tenses consistent across all Questions Presented, Answers, and IRAC analysis sections (past tense or present tense)?
- Are the names/nouns/pronouns consistent across all Questions Presented, Answers, and IRAC analysis sections (plural nouns or singular nouns, for example)?
- Do the legal standards at the beginning of each IRAC analysis section match the Question Presented to which they relate?
- Do the conclusions at the end of each IRAC analysis section match the yes/no in the Answer to which they relate?
- Did you include complete and detailed counter-analysis as required?

Writing a legal research memo might not come easily to you at first. That’s OK! Your comfort level with the skills involved in will increase the more you practice them.

CHECKLIST FOR DRAFTING THE LEGAL RESEARCH MEMO, FINAL DRAFT

Use this checklist to help you write your legal research memo final draft. Or access the interactive version - Checklist for Drafting the Legal Research Memo Final Draft.docx

MAKE SURE ALL SECTIONS ARE INCLUDED AND PROPERLY LABELED (IF REQUIRED TO BE LABELED)

__ Are you using the correct Memo heading format?

__ Do you have a work product heading?

__ Do you have a RE line that describes the broad question, identifies our file number and includes the court case name and number (if any)?

__ Do you have a Facts section?

__ Do you have Questions Presented?

__ Do you have Answers – one for each Question Presented?

__ Do you have a Discussion section – one IRAC analysis for each Question Presented?

__ Do you have a Conclusion section?

__ Are the sections in the correct order and properly labeled (if a label is required)?

MAKE SURE EACH SECTION IS COMPLETE

Note: this is the order in which I usually check each section.

FACTS:

__ Do you have all of the legally significant and contextual client facts described?

__ Did you write your facts in logical order (chronological, or by issue, or by party – whichever is simplest and flows best)?

__ Is it clear which facts are disputed (use words like appears, claims, apparently, etc.)

__ Are your facts written in narrative form (not bulleted lists or sentence fragments, but like a story)?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED:

Does each Question Presented have a narrow Legal Standard? Briefly identify each legal standard below		Does each Question Presented contain client facts relevant to the legal standard – what behavior or circumstances cause us to wonder whether the legal standard applies?
1.		__ Yes __ No -- REVISE
2.		__ Yes __ No -- REVISE
3.		__ Yes __ No -- REVISE

DISCUSSION:

IRAC Analysis:

Explain whether the legal standard will be proven, using IRAC Format

Issue	Legal standard from Question Presented #1
Rule	Words of the statute(s) being interpreted and applied in issue #1, above
	Citation of the statute(s) being interpreted and applied in Question Presented #1, above
	Is there more than one statute? If so, how are they related? Use a transition sentence or phrase to show this
	Use a transition to introduce the Court decisions interpreting the statute __ What did the Court say the statute/words mean? __ Why did the Court interpret the way it did (what tools did it use) __ Are the case law facts discussed, so you can compare them to your client’s facts? __ How did the Court apply the law to the facts in front of it?
Application	Use a transition to introduce the Client facts __ Do all of the facts you have written here relate only to the legal standard you identified in your issue, above? __ Do all of the facts you have written here appear in your Facts section, above?
Conclusion	Answer the question above (Therefore ….)

__ The IRAC components are in proper order

Is counter-analysis required?

__ No. The facts and law are undisputed and clear

__ Yes. There are disputed, unclear or missing facts; or there are facts subject to multiple reasonable inferences/interpretations

__ Disputed, unclear or missing facts are described

__ Multiple reasonable inferences/interpretations of facts are described

__ Impact (opposite conclusion) of viewing the facts in this way is described

__ Yes. The law is unclear or subject to multiple reasonable interpretations/applications; or, the legal issue is fact-intensive and none of the cases discussed in IRAC has facts identical to our client

__ Other court decisions that could be applied are described

__ Other reasonable interpretations/applications of case law are described

__ Impact (opposite conclusion) of viewing the law in this way is described

BRIEF AnswerS:

	Your answer as to whether each question presented will be proven (yes, no, probably yes, probably no)	Legal standards to prove	Did you briefly explain the law and facts that support your answer?
1.			__ Yes __ No -- REVISE
2.			__ Yes __ No -- REVISE
3.			__ Yes __ No -- REVISE

MAKE SURE THE MEMO IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT

Is the legal issue identified consistent? (briefly identify each issue and make sure it’s consistent in all #1s, #2s, #3s)	Intro Paragraph	Questions Presented	Answers	IRAC Analyses
1.	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE
2.	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE
3.	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE

Is the legal conclusion identified consistent? (briefly identify each issue and make sure it’s consistent in all #1s, #2s, #3s)	Intro Paragraph	Answers	IRAC Analyses	Counter-Analyses
1.	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE
2.	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE
3.	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE	__ Yes __ No -- REVISE

MAKE SURE THE MEMO USES GOOD WRITING MECHANICS

__ Did you run spell-checker?

__ Did you run dumb-checker (carefully proofread everything you wrote)?

Voilà! Your memo is complete! To see the final draft of our Wonka Legal Research Memo, click here.

Contributors

15: Legal Memos - Final Draft is shared under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Beth R. Pless, J.D. (Northeast Wisconsin Technical College) & edited and curated by James C. Harman, Assistant Professor, Santa Ana College.

Search

Text Color

Text Size

Margin Size

Font Type