Decide first, then write
Method suite · the ten-step worksheet
Casebook: Hazard, Fletcher, Bundy & Bradt, Pleading and Procedure (12th ed.). The syllabus skips Pennoyer and Harris v. Balk and begins at International Shoe, p. 58. Outline draft due 10.5.26; midterm 10.7.26.
IRAC organises an answer you already have. It does not tell you which issue to select, which facts matter, what the court is allowed to consider, or which argument has already been waived. That work comes first, and this page gives it a shape.
The decision worksheet
The reusable decision worksheet
This is a navigation aid, not a claim that every court must decide issues in this order. Some threshold issues can be sequenced differently under governing law. Treat it as a way of working, not a rule about the order in which courts must decide things.
| Step | Question | Required output |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Task | What exactly must I decide or advise? | One sentence naming the pending request and requested product |
| 2. Posture | Where is the case, and what has happened? | Court, parties, stage, chronology, existing rulings |
| 3. Authority | What source governs this decision? | Specific rule/statute and relevant interpretive doctrine |
| 4. Availability | Can this actor invoke this mechanism now? | Trigger, timing, waiver, prerequisites, standing where relevant |
| 5. Standard and burden | What must be established, by whom? | Structured test; distinguish production from persuasion |
| 6. Record | What information may support this decision? | Permissible material, disputed facts, assumptions, unknowns |
| 7. Application | Why do these facts satisfy or fail the test? | Fact → inference → legal significance |
| 8. Opposition | What is the strongest contrary account? | A real counterargument and a reasoned response |
| 9. Consequence | What should the court do, and what remains? | Grant/deny/limit/defer; scope and next procedural step |
| 10. Preservation and review | What must happen to retain a challenge? | Necessary action, record, deadline source, review route |
Use it in three stages: first with the labels in front of you; then from memory, in the two drills below; then, on each problem, deciding which steps actually carry the weight — which is how every Decision Lab begins.
Rebuild it from memory
Stage two. The labels come off; you put the structure back.
Put the ten steps in working order
Use the arrows. Some real problems re-sequence threshold issues, but this is the default route through a decision.
Which step produces this?
Each step has a required output. Name the step from the output alone.
Inside an answer
The reasoning unit inside an answer
Because [specific fact], [inference] follows. That matters under [particular requirement] because [connection]. The opponent's strongest response is [counterargument]. It is stronger/weaker because [fact or legal distinction]. Therefore [qualified procedural consequence].
This is training scaffolding. Strong finished writing need not repeat the template mechanically.
Weak: “There are minimum contacts because the company sells products.”
Better: “The company deliberately sold this model to customers in the forum and maintained a local repair network. Those activities connect the defendant to the forum itself and relate to this resident's in-state injury from that model. The fact that this particular unit was originally sold elsewhere is not by itself decisive under Ford. The court must still identify statutory authorization and complete the applicable jurisdictional analysis.” C2
Why IRAC or CREAC alone does not solve the problem
IRAC and CREAC organize a communicated answer. They do not tell you which issue to select, which facts matter, what the court may consider, or which argument has been waived. Work the decision worksheet first; then turn its output into an organized answer.
| Analytical work | Place in a conventional answer |
|---|---|
| Identify the disputed procedural question | Issue or opening conclusion |
| Select and structure controlling law | Rule and explanation |
| Map facts, draw inferences, test opposition | Application |
| Identify ruling and practical consequence | Conclusion |
The grammar of legal tests
Check whether a test contains:
- Conjunctive requirements: all must be met.
- Alternatives: one authorized route may suffice.
- Factors: weight and interaction matter; counting is not enough.
- Exceptions: a general rule may apply until an exception changes the result.
- Discretion: satisfaction of prerequisites may permit, rather than compel, relief.
- Preservation conditions: a substantively strong contention may require earlier action.
Mark the operative words whenever you read an actual rule. A rule's structure is part of its meaning.
Maintain two linked maps
The claim map records who seeks what from whom. The procedural map records what decision each party wants from the court now. Add each new claim as a separate row:
| Claimant | Opponent | Claim and relief | Joinder mechanism | Subject-matter basis | Personal-jurisdiction question | Current request |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party A | Party B | State contract damages | Original claim | Diversity, if established | Power over B | Rule 12 motion |
| Party B | Party C | Contractual indemnification | Rule 14, if derivative | Independently check | Power over C | Leave to implead, if required |
A successful joinder choice never settles jurisdiction for you — each claim still needs its own basis.
What a case brief must preserve
Read cases for their reasoning boundaries, not only their names. A useful brief identifies:
- the procedural posture and requested relief;
- the rule source and disputed requirement;
- the legally decisive facts;
- the inference connecting those facts to the result;
- the holding's scope and an important limit;
- a changed fact that would make the precedent weaker or stronger.
For example, Ford is useful for relatedness, but not a license to say that every company selling anything in a state can be sued there on every claim. C2
The bridge to a written exam
After any exercise on this site, do this before moving on:
“Close the answer. In your own words, explain the motion, governing test, two decisive facts, strongest counterargument, and likely ruling. Then compare your explanation with the rubric.”
For a written rehearsal, work from the problem alone and keep the answer closed until you choose to open it. Nothing here asks you to type or upload anything; the writing happens off-screen.
Allocate your attention: resolve clear stipulated matters briefly and devote explanation to disputed, consequential requirements. “Discuss everything you know” is a poor substitute for following the call of the question.