Putting The C Back In IRAC

Jacob S. Sherkow (Illinois; Google Scholar), Putting the C Back in IRAC, 27 Green Bag 39 (2024): 

Read a law school exam these days, and you're likely to find one of the IRAC elements given short-shrift: the conclusion, C. That's unfortunate because conclusions in legal writing are important for myriad reasons. A legal system that focuses solely on the R and A of IRAC thinks that all facts are held equal and makes legal decision-making an act of automaton. Bad conclusions make for both bad writing and bad practice, so testing law students in drafting good conclusions is important—and more important than currently considered. Conclusions are important because they demand that most precious skill of lawyers: good judgment, what we expect our students to walk away with, if nothing else. It's time to put the C back in IRAC.

Conclusion
Conclusions in legal writing are important for myriad reasons, so testing law students in drafting them is similarly important. And yet, partly through pedagogical error and partly through student error, legal education seems to discount conclusions. The conclusion, on that, is this: because bad conclusions make for both bad writing and bad practice, that diminishment needs to stop. A legal system that focuses solely on the R and A of IRAC thinks that all facts are held equal and makes legal decisionmaking an act of automaton. It’s not – at least not yet. Conclusions are important because they demand that most precious skill of lawyers: good judgment, what we expect our students to walk away with, if nothing else.