Business Plan Revision legal three

see legal three of the first write up.Thanks.
ATTACHED FILE(S)
CommentsCREMINAL LAW
Issues Covered:
You missed major issues.
You missed important sub-issues.
You need to address the call of the question.
Law Knowledge and Use:
You didn’t provide enough law or legal definitions to key terms.
You provided too much recitation or discussion of the law in general, rather than applying laws to the facts.
You need to focus on proving or disproving the elements of the rules of law in your analysis.
Argument and Analysis:
You were too conclusionary and did not provide enough argument for both sides of the issues. You need to play with the facts more and adequately explain the arguments both sides would be expected to make.
You need to explain why you believe the facts lead to the conclusion you reached.
Format and Structure:
You need to use the IRAC format.
Your essay would be improved with more white space. Skip lines between issues and skip lines within the sections, following the issue statement, rule, and analysis.
You need to label the issues discussed with an issue statement framed as a yes/no question or with the legal topic covered. This may help you focus your analysis on answering the question, as opposed to simply telling what you know about a topic.
Writing Style:
Mechanics:
AdditionalComments
You spotted some of the important issues in this exam, but many others were missed. Going forward, remember that your primary job on law school exams is not just to talk about the issues but to *prove* whether and why the facts are sufficient to meet the relevant legal standards.
In this case, each of the following issues should have been addressed and individually analyzed through methodical and thorough IRAC approach for each: Did Ed commit conspiracy? / Is Ed liable for Frank’s actions through application of Pinkerton’s Rule? / Did Ed commit common law burglary? / Did Ed commit statutory burglary? / Is Ed liable for the assault of Wanda? / Is Ed liable for the kidnapping of Wanda? / Is Ed liable for the false imprisonment of Wanda? / Did Ed commit robbery? / Is Ed liable for assault of the police officers?
To effectively and accurately IRAC each of these issues, you would follow the issue question with a statement of the governing legal rule. Then you would apply the facts in a way that evaluated each element of the governing legal rule to establish whether there is sufficient proof of the charge. Only after that process could you reach a conclusion about what Ed’s liability would be for each particular charge.
You addressed the robbery issue thoroughly and caught an important distinction between the larceny that the men originally conspire and planned to commit and the robbery that they ultimately wound up committing. That was a good catch.
But this was a criminal law exam and there is no need to discuss potential torts. The call of the question for this exam focused only on the potential crimes and defenses for Ed.
Importantly, whenever you encounter an untimely death on a criminal law exam, there are a set of issues that need to be analyzed fully, methodically, and in order. Because each of these issues builds upon what came before, you should use the following format: 1) Was there a homicide? 2) Was the defendant the actual cause of the homicide? 3) Was the defendant the proximate cause of the homicide? 4) Was there a murder? 5) Were the elements of first degree murder satisfied? Remember that your job is to prove whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain charging a defendant with murder. That is a factually intense and legally complex effort that requires diligence, nuance, and significant detail.
Without thorough analysis for each of these five elements, you cannot sustain a charge for murder. And, because each issue is governed by its own distinct rule of law, independent IRAC analysis is required for each issue.
In this case, that means you needed to undertake a review of each of these issues for Wanda’s death and then, separately, you also needed to review each of these issues for Frank’s death. Because there were two unlawful deaths that occurred independently from one another, Ed’s liability can only be assessed by reviewing these elements for each death, separately. Only after working through each of those issues can you support a conclusion about what Ed’s liability will actually be for the deaths.
You are learning the substantive law. Now it’s time to take the next step by learning how to present and apply that knowledge in the most effective way to succeed on essay exams.
Best,
Revision CommentsTorts
Issues Covered:
You missed major issues.
You missed important sub-issues.
You need to address the call of the question.
Law Knowledge and Use:
You didn’t provide enough law or legal definitions to key terms.
You provided too much recitation or discussion of the law in general, rather than applying laws to the facts.
You need to focus on proving or disproving the elements of the rules of law in your analysis.
Argument and Analysis:
You were too conclusionary and did not provide enough argument for both sides of the issues. You need to play with the facts more and adequately explain the arguments both sides would be expected to make.
You need to explain why you believe the facts lead to the conclusion you reached.
Format and Structure:
You need to use the IRAC format.
Your essay would be improved with more white space. Skip lines between issues and skip lines within the sections, following the issue statement, rule, and analysis.
You need to label the issues discussed with an issue statement framed as a yes/no question or with the legal topic covered. This may help you focus your analysis on answering the question, as opposed to simply telling what you know about a topic.
Writing Style:
Mechanics:
AdditionalComments
Teddy,
Your essay shows that you have learned the foundations of tort law and that you understand the basis behind the laws. Unfortunately, the primary purpose of a law school exam is to apply that knowledge in a way that accurately evaluates the legal issues raised by a hypothetical fact pattern.
In this case, you were tasked with evaluating Ken’s claims of negligence, battery, and assault against Larry — as well as Larry’s claims of negligence, battery, and assault against Ken. Because the call of the question only asked you to evaluate these six claims, Jane’s actions are irrelevant and immaterial for this essay.
Remember also that conclusions are only effective if they are supported with proof.
In this case, effective analysis of the issues required you to individually analyze and prove whether the elements of the claims have been met under the facts presented.
For example, in order for Larry to prevail in his negligence claim against Ken, he needs to prove that Ken owed a duty, that Ken breached his duty, that Ken’s breach was both the actual and proximate cause of the harm suffered, and that Larry actually suffered harm. Those are the particular elements that you needed to methodically evaluate and thoroughly prove in your essay before you could arrive at a conclusion as to whether Ken was negligent.
In doing this, consider whether Ken owed a general duty and/or a special duty —as well as why. This proof is built by explaining what the legal rules are for these various standards of duty and then evaluating whether and how they apply to the situation involving Ken.
As a matter of law, the general duty owed is that of a reasonable person under the same or similar circumstances. That means in order to prove that a general duty was breached, you need to establish whether the defendant acted as a reasonable person would have under the circumstances. As well as why or why not.
Both actual and proximate causation have their own legal rules and standards for proving — which means that they need to be individually IRAC’d and evaluated. This is a fact specific inquiry that requires nuance and depth to establish.
And then, this same approach is what you would need to do, separately, in order to determine whether Ken could prevail in his negligence claim against Larry.
Evaluating and proving the intentional torts requires a similar approach.
For example, as it relates to battery by Ken, your analysis might look something like the following:
“Did Ken commit battery?” (Skip a line) “Battery is the intentional, harmful or offensive touching of another.” (Skip a line) “In this case, the facts show that Ken grabbed Larry’s driver’s license from his hand and ripped it in half. Grabbing something from another is an intentional act. It is not something that can be done by accident. In order to grab the license, Ken had to make a series of sequential movements targeted at accomplishing a particular outcome. That is the definition of intentional. There is no evidence that Larry was harmed as a result of Ken’s actions. But it is very likely Larry can prove that Ken’s actions were offensive. A reasonable person would be offended if a total stranger moved aggressively to grab a personal possession out of your hand without consent. Larry’s actions of shoving Ken in return indicate he was, in fact, angry and offended by the incident. Finally, even though the facts do not show a physical touching between the two mens’ bodies, the requisite touching element is likely met. On the one hand, the facts only indicate that Ken touched the drivers license that Larry was holding — not Larry’s physical body. Under general language usage, that would not be enough to constitute a “touching of another”. But that the law supports an alternative construction of the term. General battery law considers a touching to occur if the contact is with anything closely connected to the victim’s body. In this case, Larry was holding the license in his hand at the time it was grabbed. Because the law will recognize that as being an extension of Larry’s body, it is sufficient to meet the element of a touching.” (Skip a line) “Because each of the elements set forth in the rule for battery have been met, Ken will be liable for battery.”
Then, you would undertake the same approach and individually IRAC the remaining issues identified in the call of the question: Did Ken commit assault? / Did Larry commit assault? / Did Larry commit battery?
As you learn how to craft effective legal analysis and to present your essay in a way that thoroughly evaluates each of the issues raised, I have no doubt that you will succeed in your studies. These are skills that come with time and practice. But there are a number of 1L writing classes offered throughout the year that can help you with this.
Revision CommentsCONTRACTS
Issues Covered:
You missed major issues.
You missed important sub-issues.
Law Knowledge and Use:
You didn’t provide enough law or legal definitions to key terms.
You provided too much recitation or discussion of the law in general, rather than applying laws to the facts.
You need to focus on proving or disproving the elements of the rules of law in your analysis.
Argument and Analysis:
You were too conclusionary and did not provide enough argument for both sides of the issues. You need to play with the facts more and adequately explain the arguments both sides would be expected to make.
You need to explain why you believe the facts lead to the conclusion you reached.
Format and Structure:
You need to use the IRAC format.
Your essay would be improved with more white space. Skip lines between issues and skip lines within the sections, following the issue statement, rule, and analysis.
You need to label the issues discussed with an issue statement framed as a yes/no question or with the legal topic covered. This may help you focus your analysis on answering the question, as opposed to simply telling what you know about a topic.
Writing Style:
Mechanics:
AdditionalComments
Teddy,
I can see that you have studied contract law and that you are learning what to do. Going forward, I encourage you to practice building greater depth and nuance into your analysis. It is also important to learn and implement the IRAC style of legal writing for your essays at NWCU.
Under a standard IRAC analysis, you work through each legal issue presented in the fact pattern in a way that identifies the issue, states the governing legal rule, analyzes whether the facts are (or are not) sufficient to meet each element of that rule, and then arrives at a well-reasoned conclusion.
While this is a very different style of writing than what you have done previously, it is incredibly effective for building thorough and methodical legal analysis in a way that focuses on proving whether the facts of a case meet the governing law or not.
In this case, for example, evaluating the issue of whether Bob made an offer might look like this: “Did Bob make an offer to buy the patio furniture?” (Skip a line) “An offer is the outward manifestation of present contractual intent, with certain and definite terms, that is communicated to the offeree.” (Skip a line) “In this case, the facts tell us that Bob responded to seeing Sarah’s post to sell her furniture with a text message. His text message indicated an express interest in purchasing the patio set and asked if she would accept $200. Bob’s decision to proactively and affirmatively contact Sarah about the patio furniture evidences an outward manifestation. His willingness to pay $200 in exchange for the patio set proves he had present contractual intent. The terms of his offer were sufficiently certain and definite: 1 patio set (quantity), for immediate purchase (time of performance), between Bob and Sarah (identity of the parties), for $200 (price), regarding the patio set Sarah listed for sale (subject matter). Even though the time of performance was only implied and not express, the court can use reasonable gap fillers in this case because the contract arises under the UCC. Finally, we know the offer was communicated to the offeree because the facts tell us that he texted the message directly to Sarah. Her subsequent reply proves that she didm, in fact, receive the offer” (Skip a line) “Because all elements for an offer have been established under the facts, Bob made a valid offer to Sarah.”
Thereafter, you would proceed to adopt the same approach for the rest of the issues that follow. In this way, law school essays differ from traditional essay writing in that your primary job is to build analysis that focuses on what the facts from a hypothetical prove.
As a matter of law, the first issue that you need to address for any contracts exam is which law governs — Article 2 of the UCC or common law — and why.
You are right that it to evaluate the nature of Sarah’s original posting and to consider the legal implications it set forth. And you are likely correct in your conclusion that Sarah made an invitation to treat, not an offer. But the bulk of your points on a law school essay exam comes from proving the conclusions that you assert.
To begin, why should Sarah’s online post even be considered under the rule for advertisements rather than that of a traditional offer? What about her post makes you consider whether it is an advertisement in the first place? Once you establish that the nature, language, and/or intent of the post supports concluding it was an advertisement, then you can look to the competing rules of law set forth in the rule split. What is the legal rule for advertisements? Are they considered traditional offers (binding upon acceptance) or merely invitations to solicit offers (not binding). What is the legal rule split and what does that mean for how Sarah’s online post should be evaluated, depending upon which jurisdiction it occurred in? Then, in your conclusion, it is important to account for the fact that Sarah’s post may be treated differently, depending upon the rule in the jurisdiction of the events. For example, if the events occur in a jurisdiction that follows the majority rule, her post will only be considered an invitation to solicit offers. If the events occur in a jurisdiction that follows the minority rule — and if you have provided sufficient proof to establish the terms as sufficiently definite and specific — then her post may be considered as a traditional offer that becomes binding upon acceptance. By building out a much more detailed and thorough analysis of the issue, you create stronger proof for your ultimate conclusion.
One thing to keep in mind for contracts exams is that it often helps to address the issues chronologically if they are raised in an order that gives rise to multiple contract claims. In that way, you can keep track of the legal significance of each party’s actions at every step of the way.
In this case, for example, you would want to individually IRAC, analyze, and prove the following issues in order before moving on to evaluate the significance of Sarah’s negotiations with Bob: What law governs? / Did Sarah make an advertisement? / Could Sarah’s advertisement be considered an offer in minority jurisdictions? / Did Bob accept Sarah’s offer? / Did Bob make a counteroffer? / Did Sarah make a counteroffer? / Did Sarah revoke her counteroffer? / Did Bob accept Sarah’s counteroffer? / Was their agreement supported by consideration? / Did Bob and Sarah make an enforceable contract?
Only after going through that process would you be able to arrive at an accurate and well-reasoned conclusion as to whether Sarah and Bob entered into a contract and why.
By walking through the issues individually and in order, you would find that Sarah made the final counteroffer, that she failed to effectively revoke it, that Bob accepted her counteroffer, and that their agreement was supported by consideration. As a matter of law, a contract comes into force the moment that a valid offer is accepted (provided that the agreement is supported by consideration).
For that reason, the fact that Sarah entered into a contract with Carl before Bob conveyed his acceptance is an issue that speaks to whether Sarah can *perform* each of the contracts. But it is not sufficient to impact whether Sarah and Bob actually made an enforceable contract in the first place. If you have an offer and acceptance, you can prove mutual assent between the parties. If you have mutual assent and consideration (which we do in this case) a contract is formed.
Once you establish and build out the legal implications of Sarah’s negotiations with Bob, you can move on to take the same approach in evaluating the implications of her negotiations with Carl.
In that way, the following issues should be IRAC’d and analyzed related to Carl: Did Carl make a counteroffer? / Did Sarah accept Carl’s counteroffer? Was their agreement supported by consideration? / Did Carl and Sarah make an enforceable contract?
The legal significance of Dan’s actions is more nuanced. For example, if the events occurred in a jurisdiction that follows the majority rule on advertisements, then Dan’s actions would be of limited significance. But if the events occurred in a jurisdiction that follows the minority rule on advertisements — and if you proved that Sarah’s online post met the requisite elements to be considered a binding agreement — then Dan would have a stronger claim. For example, consider what implication, if any, it might have to view Sarah’s posting as an offer for a unilateral contract. Did it invite acceptance through performance? If so, what do you make of the fact that only Dan fulfilled the requested performance? At what point do unilateral contracts come into being? When the requested performance is attempted? Or when the requested performance is completed? How might these considerations deepen your analysis of Dan’s claim to the furniture?
Once you fully explore and build out the formation issues related to Sarah’s negotiations with the three potential buyers, then you can move on to consider issues of performance, breach, and remedies.
The facts establish that Sarah entered into contracts with Bob and Carl for the same subject matter. Would Sarah be able to perform both contracts? Why or why not? If she will not be able to perform both contracts, then she will have to breach one of them. Which of the contracts would the law prioritize to enforce? Why? What does that mean for the one or two other parties who lose out? And what does any of that mean for potential remedies for the parties?
Learning the substantive law is the first step. Learning how to apply that law and convey your analysis through the IRAC format is how you succeed on law school exams.

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more