There are2 cases presented for you to develop & analyze using a complete IRAC. Please note each question is identified as either Negligence or Strict Product Liability. Be thorough in your presentation of the rules, your analysis and application of legal precedent. Carefully craft your issue statement and provide a reflective conclusion. Write your rule statement in prose, not relying on lists. Do not explain the rules and do not "tell" me what they are. Write a statement of rule. ie. The "red light rule" requires cars to stop a red lights.(explanation) vs. Failure of a vehicle to stop behind a white line when a lighted intersection shows a red traffic light is a moving violation (statement of rule). In your analysis cite case law.
Best practice is to open the test promptly. Copy and paste the two questions into word and work on them in word. When you copy and paste the answers back to Moodle be sure to check that you have retained the proper IRAC format.
Further Hints
Issue Statements: The purpose of the issue statement is to identify the general area of law which is in question. Identify the parties involved and provide a very brief fact which may be pivotal to the understanding the basis of the claim. Remember this is never a can sue statement
Rule Statement: When writing the Rule, make sure you write first the general rule and then provide the elements and defenses. This rule applies to the issue of torts and not to either party in particular. At no point should you make a list of rules. I would usually save details for the analysis. The Rule statement for Strict Product Liability must start with a general rule which focuses on the product, not the actor or the manufacturer. Remember to include defenses. Save lengthy explanations or detailed rules for your analysis. The more detailed elements are the method of explaining the general rule and elements.
Analysis: Use multiple paragraphs. Always start your analysis with a separate paragraph of facts. Then in a separate paragraph (s) tell the story of how these facts would be seen in light of the rule of law and prior case analysis of the law. Provide specific examples and hypothetical examples. Use prior cases to illustrate your points. Do not fall into the trap of begin conclusory at the beginning of your analysis. Questions must be raised, and facts looked at from the most positive point of view and the most negative. When there are multiple elements use bridge words (furthermore, additionally….) to move from one element to another. When there are defenses be sure to analyze the defenses as well as the elements.
Negligence
Jana, a famous country western singer, slips her new Chevy Silvarado truck into park and leaves her truck’s motor running while she enters a Kwik-Pik Store. The truck’s transmission slips into reverse and the vehicle knocks over and injures a patron before crashing into a gas pump and starting a fire that spreads to a warehouse on the next block. The warehouse collapses, causing its billboard to fall and injure Lou, a bystander.
Analyze Patron’s and Lou’s negligence suit against Jana (there may be different results). Use complete IRAC presentation including relevant defenses Jana may raise. Write your issue statement as a single sentence. Bring in appropriate case law to support your analysis. Consider and discuss policy issues behind the seminal cases as it applies to this case. Use hypotheticals to offer a different fact to illustrate a different outcome if that is appropriate.
Strict Product Liability
Baxter manufactures electric hair dryers and curling irons. Julie purchases a Baxter curling iron r from her local Ace Drugstore. Cox, a friend and guest in Julie’s home, has taken a shower and wants to curl her hair. Julie tells Cox to use the Baxter hair curler that she has just purchased. Cox picks the curler up from the puddle of water where Julie has left it. As she plugs in the curler, sparks fly from the motor, and sparks continue to fly as she operates it. Despite this Cox begins curling her hair. Suddenly, the overheated curler ignites into flames, severely burning Cox’s scalp.
Using IRAC analyze Cox’s Strict Product Liability claim against Baxter. Include relevant defenses in your analysis. Bring in appropriate case law to support your analysis. In your analysis, be sure to discuss how different elements are determined. Again, if use of a hypothetical makes your discussion clearer please do so.
Find Rubric