You are helping Mr. LaLumier’s lawyer. select the one best argument for his defense and analyze it. In writing your essay, use the techniques described in the class handout called, “Handout on Legal Reasoning and Writing.”

.1 In the exercises and examinations for this course, you will be given much
simpler scenarios and will be asked analyze issues that are identified for you. In a law school
examination, students are expected to draw upon all the scores of cases they have read during the
semester. In this course, the exam questions usually will ask you to draw on only one or two cases,
which will be provided to you.
This handout is intended to introduce you to the art and science of legal reasoning and the
writing of argument. No such handout can provide more than the simplest introduction to this subject.
For MPH students who wish to study legal reasoning and the writing of argument in more depth, the
handout lists some suggestions for additional reading.
II. Notes on Legal Reasoning
Appellate courts2 and lawyers borrow their methods of reasoning from the disciplines of logic,
philosophy, rhetoric, and semantics. These are big subjects, and these notes can provide only the barest
of introductions. Even so, they may be useful to MPH students taking this course. They may even be
useful to law students, because surprisingly, legal reasoning per se is not taught in most law schools. Law
students absorb this subject not by formal study, but through osmosis in class, on examinations, and by
studying legal opinions.
The classical rules of logic are part of all legal argument, and they infuse the use of precedent,
the foundation of the law. Deductive reasoning, for example, is often part of the process of analogy to
precedential cases. The following syllogism is an example:3
1) All contracts with vague terms are void (a legal principle),
2) The contract in the present case4 contains a vague term (a fact),
3) Therefore, the contract in the present case is void (a conclusion).
Legal reasoning also employs inductive logic, as the following example shows:
1) The present case deals with Vague Term A, Fact B, and Fact C,
2) The controlling appellate case dealt with Vague Term A, Fact B, and Fact C, and held that the
contract was void.
1 An issue, in legal parlance, is a question that must be answered in order to reach a conclusion.
2 In courses on law, both in law school and public health school, virtually all the cases assigned as reading are from
appellate courts. Because lower courts (i.e., trial courts) do not often create precedents binding on other courts,
law courses always concentrate on appellate cases.
3 Granberg RS. Legal reasoning. Undated. Available at: granberglaw.com.
4 gPresent caseh (also sometimes called the ginstant caseh) means the case now under consideration by a court or
by lawyers.
3
3) Therefore, the contract in the present case is void.
Courts reject arguments that are logically contradictory or inconsistent. For example, a court that must
rule on the sufficiency of an argument about the cause of an injury will not accept as the cause an
exposure event that occurred after the injury.
The following are some common types of legal reasoning used in appellate court decisions. The
uses of these types overlap, and any one court decision may be based on one or more of the listed
types:
1. Precedent: analogizing and distinguishing cases. Stare decisis5 is one of the foundations of legal
reasoning and is the basis of most appellate decisions. A lawyer who locates a precedential case that
is favorable to his client will argue that his clientfs situation is very close to the facts of the
precedential case. On the other hand, a lawyer trying to escape the effects of a precedential case
will argue that his clientfs situation is distinguishable from the precedent. A large proportion of legal
argument consists of this analogizing and distinguishing present cases from precedential ones.
Because no case in court is ever completely gon all foursh (i.e., identical as to facts) with a
controlling precedential case, much of legal analysis consists of: a) arguing how close or far the facts
in the present case are to the facts of precedential cases, b) the validity of the precedent, c) the
application of the precedent to the present case. For example, let us say a court once decided that a
certain maneuver by a driver of a Cadillac car constituted reckless driving. Another driver charged
with making the identical maneuver in the same jurisdiction might try to argue that his case was
differentiable because he was driving a Ford instead of a Cadillac. The prosecutor would argue that
the maneuver was important for stare decisis, but not the brand of the automobile.
2. Application of jurisprudential principles. Courts make some decisions deductively based on broad
jurisprudential principles. An example is res judicata, the principle that, if a case has already been
decided, a court will refuse to decide the same case again.
3. Totality of the circumstances: balancing multiple factors. Instead of using one or two jurisprudential
principles or precedential cases, courts might analyze disputes based on multiple factors (sometimes
part of a gbalancing testh), and then decide the case based on the totality of those factors. The
multiple factors that the court must consider may be found in precedential cases, statutes,
regulations, or principles of law. Courts that decide precedential cases often provide no guidance as
to the relative weights that other courts should place on the various factors. For example, in
deciding whether a child has the state citizenship of the biological parent or of the adult acting as a
guardian, a court considers three factors: a) the duration in the state, b) the intent of the adult to
stay in the state, and c) actual custody and control of the child, including such questions as who
5 Stare decisis (pronounced STAR]ee dess]EYE]siss; from Latin, glet the decision standh) is a policy of courts to stand
by precedent and not to disturb settled points of law. The doctrine that, when a court has once laid down a
principle of law as applicable to a certain set of facts, it will adhere to that principle, and apply it to all future cases,
where facts are substantially the same; regardless of whether the parties and property are the same. gc [A]
binding precedent in the same court, or in other courts of equal or lower rank in subsequent cases where the very
point is again in controversy.h Blackfs law dictionary, abridged fifth edition. St. Paul, Minn.: Westfs Publishing;
1983.
4
supports the child, who provides guidance, who protects the child, and who is the decision maker
about medical treatment, education, and legal advice.6
4. Interpretation of language. Cases often involve interpretation of written laws, including legal
opinions by judges, and they often revolve around the meaning of language. For example, the
Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits gunreasonable searches and seizures.h
Decades of arguments and court decisions have helped define what gunreasonableh means in the
Amendment. To decide cases based upon the meaning of language, courts may accept the gplain
meaningh of the text, or they may try to discern the intent of the drafters, such as another judge or
a legislature.
5. First principles. Courts sometimes resort to first principles to decide cases, especially when no
precedent or other guidepost exists. A court, for example, might rely on general principles of justice
or fairness to decide a case. Some first principles have become part of the common law and
therefore are already embedded in precedent. In a famous case, the Walker]Thomas Furniture
Company sold multiple items on an installment plan to Ora Lee Williams, a single mother. The
installment contract stated that none of Williamsf furniture was considered paid for until she had
made the final installment payment. When she failed to make payments on the very last furniture
item, the furniture store attempted to repossess all the furniture, not just the last one purchased.
The court ruled that this was unconscionable. Williams v. Walker]Thomas Furniture Co., 350 F.2d
445 (D.C. Cir. 1965).
6. Policy or utility. Courts sometimes use arguments based on social policy or utility to decide cases,
especially when there is no precedent to rely on. Courts do not like to make decisions that will prove
unworkable in society or that will result in an absurdity. On the other hand, courts do not view
themselves as policy]making bodies and rarely label decisions as based on policy.
7. Competency of the court. Courts sometimes refuse to decide certain cases because they conclude
that a court is not the proper place for the question to be answered. For example, a court might
determine that a dispute is a political one, not a legal one, and should be decided by the legislature
instead of the courts.
III. Common Problems in Writing Argument
Many students in public health school are accustomed to examinations that ask for a single
gright answer.h Questions in law, however, only rarely have a right answer. Yes, certain questions that
are strictly factual do have right and wrong answers (e.g., what were the six causes of action stated by
the plaintiff in her brief of July 17, 1996?), but only rarely is this type of question part of writing
argument. The exercises, and the midterm and final examinations in this course will require you to write
argument. The examination questions generally do not call for factual answers, but instead require you
to write a thesis essay in which you must: a) clarify the issue being addressed in the question, b) state
6 Shapo HS, Walter MR, Fajans E. Writing and Analysis in the law. New York: Foundation Press; 2008: 136.
5
the rule or standard by which the answer is to be argued, and then, c) using an interweave of facts and
argument, analyze and argue each issue in order and provide support for a conclusion.
The mere absence of a grighth answer does not mean that you can discount the factual material
presented. In writing argument, however, knowledge of the factual material is only the beginning. In
writing argument, you must use the factual material for analysis and argument. Here are some of the
most common problems I have noticed in students trying to write argument for the first time:
. Failing to state a thesis, even when the question expressly requires one. Many students provide a
reasonable analysis in their answers, but they never state a thesis or conclusion. Surprisingly, some
students make this mistake even when the question expressly asks for a conclusion.
. Stating conclusions summarily or not explaining the stepwise path of reasoning that led to the
conclusions. A telltale sign of this error can be the use of the words, gclearlyh or gobviously.h Use of
these words might mean that a student is stating a conclusory statement in place of a full path of
reasoning. Avoid these terms.
. Stating an assertion nakedly, without providing a proper reference or basis for it. Assertions of fact
or principle or rule should be accompanied by a source, unless it is obvious or from the question
itself.
. Unnecessarily repeating the question, or reciting the facts. The only time you should recite the facts
or something provided in the question is when you do so as part of your analysis, when you are
applying the law to facts. Yes, you may need to repeat a few facts or assumptions provided in the
question as part of the flow of ideas in your answer. You should never, however, use valuable
answer space by merely repeating the facts or assumptions provided in the question.
. Using excessive direct quotations from the question, from cases, etc. One or two very short
quotations are okay, but do not use valuable space with lengthy quotations. A direct quotation from
a case is not a substitute for a good statement of the principle of the case. An exception to this rule
is when you must interpret the text of a rule, a statute, etc. In that case, always start with the
verbatim language of the law. Avoid paraphrasing written laws.

 
ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!