LIBR 430 WEEK 8 Synthesizing Legal Information

Analogies & Distinctions

Case comparison is based on the premise that like cases should be decided in like manner

Making valid predictions involves drawing analogies from similar cases Similar issues, possibly fact patterns Applicable reasoning & policy statements

When Reasoning, Discussing and Writing

Demonstrate that the case is binding legal authority

Assure the reader that the facts you’re comparing were key facts in the decided case

Give reader enough information to make independent comparison

Analyzing Multiple Cases

Multiple cases might address a particular issue but with many different variations

Precedents oftentimes has different fact patterns to client’s case and one another with different results

Goal: Reconcile diverse results and advise client on the predicted outcome

Synthesis

Purpose – to find collective meaning in cases Rules of law are clarified through multiple

cases Involves more than listing cases

When to Synthesize

No express definition of an element Rule not expressly stated Definition is vague Cases analogized don’t address all the

determinative facts Several cases are all relevant in some way

Cannot fully understand a rule of law from just one case

After reviewing several cases, communicate the standards the court will apply

Collective legal proposition more important than a list of case briefs

Why Synthesize

Synthesis is a Common Process

We synthesize information daily Creating a chart may help, especially if it is

a complex issue Synthesis can be a difficult skill that

requires practice

Neighbor ignores a sign warning trespassers to keep out and enters Mr. Jones' land to smell his award winning roses.

Held: Neighbor liable for trespass

Example

Neighbor ignores a sign warning trespassers to keep out and enters Mr. Jones' land seeking to escape a mob of angry bees.

Held: Neighbor not liable for trespass.

Neighbor ignores a sign warning trespassers to keep out and enters Mr. Jones' land seeking to escape a swarm of angry bees.

While evading his pursuers, neighbor accidentally tramples on Mr. Jones' award winning roses.

Held: Neighbor liable for damages to roses.

What do the Three Cases Stand for Collectively?

A. Neighbor ignores a sign warning trespassers to keep out and enters Mr. Jones' land to smell his award winning roses. Held: Neighbor liable for trespass.

B. Neighbor ignores a sign warning trespassers to keep out and enters Mr. Jones' land seeking to escape a swarm of angry bees. Held: Neighbor not liable for trespass.

C. Neighbor ignores a sign warning trespassers to keep out and enters Mr. Jones' land seeking to escape a swarm of angry bees. While evading his pursuers, Neighbor accidentally tramples on Mr. Jones' award winning roses.

Held: Professor Berry liable for damages to roses.

Look for the Common Threads

In each case, Neighbor was trespassing on someone’s land without permission, but the results were different

The decision maker considered different factors to modify the rule.

How?

• The proposition in the first case is that a person is liable for trespass if they enter someone’s land without permission

How?

The second case modifies the rule established in the first case. A person is relieved of liability from trespass when it is necessary to protect oneself from physical danger.

How Cont’d.

This case refines the rule further. When someone trespasses out of necessity, they are still liable for any actual damage to the property.

Sample Chart

Trespass Necessity Property Damage

Liable for Trespass

A. Yes No No Yes

B. Yes Yes No No

C. Yes Yes Yes No, but liable for property damage

What’s the collective meaning?

"A person who enters the land of another without permission is liable for trespass except where entry is necessary to avoid physical danger, in which case a person is liable only for actual damage to the property."

Using the Factors

Identifying the factors Factors – categories of facts the court

considers to decide an issue Elements are conditions that must be present,

but factors are guidelines the court will consider

First, Find the Common Threads

Identify the common threads in the cases Look for patterns that explain the holding

A particular fact Combination of factors Policy considerations Once locate pattern, easier to locate the

factors

After Locating Common Threads

Tie the common threads together The synthesized rule should reflect the

different cases, definitions, limitations and exceptions, in a coherent statement

Organize your analysis around the common threads, not the individual cases

Apply synthesized rule to facts on hand