case
fatimahalmohsin
Rubric_IRAC.docxCase name: ((Tripp v. Williams, 39 Misc.3d 318 (2013)))
|
Category |
Not Sufficient |
Sufficient |
Outstanding |
Student |
|
IRAC Analysis |
||||
|
Facts: Clearly state the relevant facts. A fact is relevant if it helps to identify the issue, rule and application. |
No relevant fact is identified or procedural history is missing
Point 0 |
Only some of the relevant facts are identified and/or procedural history is missing Point 1 |
All relevant facts are identified and procedural history is clearly identified
Point 2 |
|
|
Procedural History: This is a short discussion of how the case reached the Court and it must clearly state the Court that is deciding the case |
The procedural history is missing or wrong
Point 0 |
The procedural history is stated and accurate Point 1 |
|
|
|
Issue: This section identifies the area of law that is relevant to the question |
Area of law is not identified
Point 0 |
Area of law is correctly identified
Point 1 |
Area and legal problems are correctly identified Point 2 |
|
|
Rule: This section identifies the relevant legal principles and, when applicable, source of authority |
No relevant legal principle has been identified Point 0 |
Some legal principles have been identified Point 1 |
All relevant legal principles have been identified
Point 2 |
|
|
Application: This consider each legal principle identified in the rule, explain the relevant facts and discusses how the Court applies the rule to the facts |
The discussion of the facts does not refer to any of the relevant legal principles or vice versa
Point 0 |
The discussion considers some of the relevant legal principles but does not apply those principles to the key facts to support a logical conclusion Point 2 |
Facts and legal principle are logically related as to support the conclusion reached by the Court
Point 3 |
|
|
Conclusion: The conclusion (reached by the Court) is clearly stated and provides an overview of how the argument and the application section addresses the issue |
The conclusion is not stated or is not supported
Point 0 |
The conclusion is stated and supported by some arguments Point 1 |
Conclusion is stated and supported by all arguments
Point 2 |
|
|
Critical Analysis: The student identifies both the legal and social implications of the case |
The critical analysis is not stated or not related to the case
Point 0 |
The critical analysis is stated and related to the case but only the legal of social implications are discussed Point 1 |
The critical analysis is stated, related to the case and both the legal and social implications are discussed
Point 2 |
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
|
