492: Legal Writing and IRAC (w/Rebecca Petrilli from Themis Bar Review)

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Lee Burgess (00:01):
Welcome back to the Law School Toolbox podcast.
Today we are excited to haveRebecca Petrilli from Themis
Bar Prep as our guest, talkingabout legal writing and IRAC-ing.
Your Law School Toolbox hosts are AlisonMonahan and Lee Burgess, that's me.
We're here to demystify the lawschool and early legal career
experience, so you'll be the bestlaw student and lawyer you can be.

(00:22):
We're the co-creators of the Law SchoolToolbox, the Bar Exam Toolbox, and the
career-related website CareerDicta.
Alison also runs TheGirl's Guide to Law School.
If you enjoy the show, pleaseleave a review or rating on
your favorite listening app.
And if you have any questions,don't hesitate to reach out to us.
You can reach us via the contactform on LawSchoolToolbox.com,
and we'd love to hear from you.
And with that, let's get started.

(00:51):
Everyone's journey through lawschool and licensure is unique.
Even if the bar exam seems far off,it's never too early to plan ahead.
That's why I'm excited to share anincredible opportunity from Themis Bar
Review that you won't want to miss,especially if you're looking to save big.
Themis courses are designed to prepareyou for the bar exam with comprehensive

(01:11):
materials like 15 to 20-minute lecturevideos, targeted outlines, and practice
questions tailored to your jurisdiction.
Although you're not sitting forthe bar yet, locking in your prep
now can save you money and stress.
Plus, you can rest easy knowing thatThemis has a proven track record,
with first-time taker pass rates thatoften surpass statewide averages.

(01:32):
In July 2023, first-time test takerswho completed 75% or more of their
course, averaged a 12% higher passrate than their respective state rate.
Enroll now to secure top-notchresources when you need them.

And save with our exclusive offer: Save $900 on any July 2025 Themis (01:46):
undefined
Bar Review course using the codeLAWSCHOOLTB900 at checkout, now
valid through May 19th, 2025.
That's LAWSCHOOLTB900,available until May 19th.

(02:11):
Today we are excited to welcome RebeccaPetrilli - Midwest Attorney Director at
Themis Bar Prep - back to the podcast todiscuss IRAC and best practices for legal
writing on exams, including the bar exam.
So Rebecca, welcome back to the podcast.
Thank you.
Glad to

Rebecca Petrilli (02:28):
be here,

Lee.
Yeah, good to see you backin my Zoom box, we hang out.
But for those who haven't heard ourprevious conversations, could you
just introduce yourself and a littleabout how you ended up in this role?

Definitely.
So, I was actually a Themisrep when I was in law school.
So, I started second semesterof my 1L year and have been
locked into Themis ever since.
I used it for the MPRE, I usedit for the bar, and now here I
am - almost a decade later, sevenyears later, working with students.
And I ended up in this role because I wasa first-generation law student and I had

(03:03):
no idea what was happening in law school.
And then I became a Themis rep, andit was such a valuable experience for
me, getting information about not onlywhat is the bar exam and how you study
for it, but all the resources thatwe have to offer to students while
they're in law school were such ahelpful part of my law school journey.
And now I'm glad to be able to help sharethat information with more students.

Amazing.
Alright, today we wanted to talk aboutthe ever-loaded term IRAC, which is
something that we talk about in lawschool, we talk about it for the bar.
Hopefully everyone listeninghas an idea of what IRAC is.
It's just our Issue, Rule, Analysis,and Conclusion - this formula that we

(03:45):
use for legal writing, legal exams.
And it seems like it is simple, becauseit's only four letters, but it can be
difficult to implement for some students.
In fact, I'm just doing a podcastseries called "Legal Writing Makeover"
that will be released very soon.
And we're talking abouteach part of the IRAC.
So it is something that doestake an awful lot of practice.

(04:09):
Your expertise is really in the bar worldand you talk to students about bar prep,
and writing is such a big part of the bar.
What aspects of this kind offormulaic writing do you think is a
challenge for students, or do theymisunderstand it or misinterpret
what they're being asked to do?

So I think the key word that you've said a couple
of times already is "formula".
It is a formula.
You are following a very specificmethodology to showcase your answer.
And where I see a lot of students getlost is in the showing your work part,
where it is, "Okay, I have this rulestatement, I understand the rule. I know
what holding I'm trying to go with here."But what's missing is the analysis that

(04:52):
brings in every single relevant fact.
And you can never assume that anythingis common sense in legal writing.
You have to imagine that you're writingto somebody who has no idea what you're
talking about, and be able to walkthem through the process step by step.
So, I would say that is in myexperience the biggest place
where I see deficiencies.

Yeah.
And I think that sometimes weovercomplicate the legal writing,
and I would say that this istrue especially for the bar exam.
The formula feels formulaic, boring,like you don't really know what
you're talking about, because it'sso simplistic, yet that's really
what the graders are looking for.
When your Themis graders are out thereworking with students, are they able

(05:33):
to give them feedback to help themuse these formulas to their advantage?

Absolutely.
Our graders give really detailed feedback.
So, you're going to get inline feedbackof, "You missed this rule statement"
or, "You stated the rule slightlyincorrectly" or, "You didn't have
enough analysis here" or, "Your rulestatement was right, but your conclusion
was wrong." Whatever applies to yourspecific essay, you'll have those pieces
sprinkled throughout, and then at theend you get some summary guidance:

(06:00):
You did great on, let's say structure,but your analysis was deficient;
or you got all the rule statementsright, but whatever else was wrong.
And then you get numbered scores.
So it's a lot of varied feedback.
feedback Yeah.

And I think the other thing that folks really need to keep
in mind - and we've talked about thison previous episodes I've done with
a former California bar grader - ishow quickly these graders, both in
your bar prep, but also in the actualexam situation, even your law school
professors are reading this material.
They are not reading it like a novel.

(06:37):
They are reading it very quickly,and these formulas really help them
do that job and be very good at it.
So, what you're really doing isenabling them to make their job
easier, which I always think is agood thing to make your grader happy,
in whatever context it might be.
But the formulas really allow you to dothat, and I think that can be important.

I totally agree.
It's all about making it sothey can spot where you're going
to get those points easily.
That, from your perspective as the studentwriting, is: "How clearly can I separate
out my sections?" So we know exactly wherethe rule, the issue, the analysis, right?
Like, where is everything?
And "Am I being as succinct as possible?"We don't need 5,000 words, right?

(07:23):
That's an exaggeration, obviously.
But the simpler the language youcan use to convey your point, the
more likely it is that what you'retrying to say is going to be clear.

Yeah.
I've seen some really high scoring, veryshort essays in law school and on the bar.
So, length is not always your friend.
And I think that can be something thatis very hard for students to recognize,
because you can copy and paste, nowthat we all take the exam on laptops.
And copy and paste is not always yourfriend, because the graders don't

(07:51):
want to read copy and pasted stuff.
That doesn't do anything for them, right?
Being like, "Oh, thanks for restatingsomething you stated up there. I've
already read it once. I don't reallywant to read it again." So, this idea
that it has to be a certain lengthto collect all the points is just
not really as important as I thinka lot of people make it out to be.
Yeah, absolutely.

I think another thing to consider too is that when
you're getting your scores, whenyou're getting those points, you're
starting at zero and you're building up.
You're gaining points foreverything that you get right.
You're not starting at a perfectseven, if that's your grading scale,
and getting knocked down from there.
It's the other way around.
So, everything that you add in that isof value to that response is going to

(08:31):
get you points, but you're not goingto get a better score by including a
bunch of stuff that is not relevant.
Like, you're not goingto miss out on points.
I don't know how to say that in a way thatis... We're talking about being succinct.

You're trying to be super succinct.

You're not going to gain points because you're looking to
add the entire kitchen sink into it.
You're going to only get points forwhat is relevant to that response.
So, part of it too is studentsneed to memorize the law.
And I think we can chat a little bitabout that, but that's a huge part of it.
Being able to issue spot and writesuccinctly is based in large part on

(09:12):
your ability to have quick recall ofthe black-letter law for the subject
that you're writing an essay for.

True, that is the "I" and the "R".
But I think where a lot ofpeople fall apart is then they
just assume the "A" is included.
So, one of the things that Idefinitely see both in my law school
and bar work is this idea of thedreaded word "conclusory", which
of course, everybody has seen.
If you went through law schooland the bar, somebody's told you

(09:39):
something you said was conclusory.
I think it's just impossible,unless you have a very different
legal career than I do.
But this idea of needing to use theanalysis to explain yourself and
linking those rules to facts, I thinkyou get lost when you're trying to be
succinct, because it can be very boring.
If you've got a four-element test,it is very boring to say, "The first

(10:01):
element of this test is met because ofthese facts", tying these facts back.
It is so easy to either just list facts,which is not legal analysis, or just
say, "Of course this is met, because allof the elements are met, period." And
that's really what is too conclusory.
So, we've got to find a way to usethose important words like "because"

(10:24):
and just click things off your listas you go through, because it can feel
like if you just do the "I" and the"R", that you're most of the way there.
But when exams are graded, both inthe law school and in the bar space,
the analysis is really the key.
I've even had graders tell me, "If youget the wrong issue but have a decent
rule, even if you get the rule wrong,you can get quite a lot of points by

(10:45):
doing correct analysis." So, it reallyis its own thing to stand on its own.

Absolutely.
And when I mentioned that the memorizationis such an important part of it, it's
that if you can get to that issue andrule faster, then have more time in
your 30 minutes or whatever you have forthe essay, if it's a bar exam essay, to
spend time on fleshing out that analysisand giving a really clear answer.
So, I wasn't saying thatthat solves all the problems.

(11:11):
It just gives you the space to havemore freedom, rather than spending the
first 10 minutes of your essay trying tofigure out what they're even asking you.

That's true.
And if you put everything and the kitchensink in a rule statement, that's not
a very good use of your time either.
You just need enoughrule to do the analysis.
It's a little bit of a chickenor the egg problem, right?
You need enough rule to get allthe analysis, but you don't want
to have extra rule, so you justhave to really think through that.
And as students are studying and doingthese practice exams, I think that

(11:44):
you can use easy little tricks tokeep yourself honest about the IRAC.
Sometimes we even recommend that studentshave four different color highlighters, or
you can do it on your computer screen, andyou just highlight, "Did I do every part?"
And then, a good rule of thumb is that the"A" should be bigger than everything else.
And so, the "A" is not biggerthan everything else, then

(12:07):
that's not a good sign.
Now, that's not to say that sometimesan analysis can't just be one sentence.
I was working on something that wasjust about contracts, about what law
applies - is it the UCC or common law?
The answer to that isalmost always one sentence.
It is, "This is a movable goodand therefore it applies under
the UCC." That is the outlier.

(12:27):
But generally speaking, youranalysis should be longer, if not
as long as your rule statement.
Does that sound about right to you?

Oh, absolutely.
Absolutely.
And I think in terms of breaking itout to go back to your color-coding
thing, I encourage students tosay, "The issue is", "The rule is".
don't have to be writing these thingsin a way that disguises, right?
Doesn't need to be languagethat disguises the fact that
you're listing the rule there.

(12:56):
You're making it easier, again, to goback to our earlier conversation, for
your grader to find it if you just say,"The issue at hand is X, Y, and Z." So,
yes to the analysis portion being longeralmost always, but breaking out your
issue, rule, analysis, and then evenbreaking your analysis down sometimes into
subparts to make sure that those sectionsare really clear, is going to help you.

(13:20):
And even if you don't want to writeit necessarily, "The issue is" on
the bar exam, earlier on in yourpractice, to get yourself used to
that formula - definitely, I recommenddoing it like that and making it
as clear as possible that that isformula within which you're working.

Yeah.
So, sometimes we hear about CREAC,which is Conclusion, Rule, Explanation,
Analysis, Conclusion, which is a slightlydifferent modified version of IRAC.
Some folks like this CREAC formulawhen doing their performance tests,
because you lead with a conclusion oryou're doing something that's pervasive.

(13:57):
So, sometimes your header needsto be more of a conclusion or
something a bit argumentative - ina good way, not in a bad way.
But I think that the CREAC shouldnot feel, in my opinion, all that
different from the IRAC, becausethe whole idea is, you're just
giving them a very easy structure.
You still need to assume that your "A"is going to be the biggest thing, that

(14:19):
this analysis is really what's going tobe the majority of the point getters.
But perhaps you have a rule thatrequires more explanation, and
I think that's really where that"RE" comes in the idea that you're
not just stating a rule statement.
You're possibly discussing howit applies, or maybe there's a
case law that you're referencing.
That would be more in a law schoolsituation; you're not really

(14:40):
referencing case law on the bar exam.
But let's think about it in kindof a performance test context.
You do have more discussion of therules, because it's a paper - it's a
memo, it's a letter, it's a closingargument, it's whatever it is, right?
It's a bit of a differentthing than a typical exam.

(15:01):
But what I think is important to keepin mind is, even if you have more
explanation of the rule, it just doesn'ttrump the fact that you have this
analysis section that's so important.
So, an example of this would be,let's say that the performance test
that you're doing is on evidence,and you're talking about hearsay.
But you're really talking aboutdying declaration, and maybe they've

(15:23):
given you cases that give younuances about dying declaration.
And the dying declaration rule isthe dying declaration rule, it's
in the Federal Rules of Evidence.
It's not up for interpretation.
But what is up for interpretationis how the courts apply that rule.
And maybe you have case law to explainsomething that you're going to discuss.
To me, that's where that CREAC reallycomes in, like, I have to explain this

(15:47):
rule more, so I can make my arguments.
I just feel like it's importantto know that it doesn't
take away from the analysis.

Yeah, I think that's a really good point.
And to the idea of performancetests, generally, often the memo or
whatever you get at the beginningthat explains the assignment to you,
is going to give you a very clearstructure for what that looks like.
And it may ask you towrite in IRAC format.
It's not going to come out and say,"Write this in IRAC format", but the

(16:16):
way it is asking you to break downthe answers is almost always going
to give you a structure to follow.
And that's a place that I always encouragestudents to pay close attention to,
because if you already have the formulathat they want you to follow in the
assignment itself, that makes it a lotmore of a "plug and play" situation.
And again, you can then spend moretime on that analysis portion of

(16:38):
the assignment, making sure that youare giving enough information and
facts and tying everything together.

Yeah.
I also think the other thingthat's important is to remember
what they're grading on.
And this is for law schoolexams, for the bar exam.
So often I think we can become scribes,especially in a performance test
context or in an open-book context.
And so you're like, "Oh well, let megive you my dissertation on all this law

(17:08):
that I just read." The one thing that Ithink is important to always keep in mind
is what is our role as a lawyer, right?
Let's take a step back and say, thetraining to be a lawyer is different
than the training to be a paralegal,and it's different than to the
training to be a legal assistant.
So, what is supposed to make us soawesome, that we have to go to more

(17:28):
school, we have to pass the bar, weget paid more, we bill at higher rates?
What are we paying for, right?
What are you paying for?
And the idea is that we aresupposed to be trained to issue
spot and do that analysis.
That is really the point, is thatwe have different training in
theory - hopefully in truth - butin theory, to allow us to do that.

(17:49):
That is what our clients need, right?
They need to take us factsand say, "I have a problem.
What are the legal ramificationsof my problem?" And then you have
to be able to say, "Okay, it lookslike your issue is you didn't get
paid for the work that you did.
And then the rule for that in Californiais X, Y, Z. And then, depending on how
that rule is applied by the courts,these are your options, and now, maybe

(18:11):
you should win, but there are all ofthese other considerations." That is
what we are supposed to be trained to do.
And so, I think it's always a good ideawhen folks get frustrated with the bar
- which has plenty of stuff to be frustratedabout, so I'm definitely arguing that
we can't be frustrated with the bar.
But when we get frustrated by thetask that the bar is putting in front
of us or that our law school examsare putting in front of us, I do

(18:33):
think that it's important to rememberthat in the end, this is our jobs.
I mean, maybe not your and my jobs,because we're not giving legal
advice all the time, although I amstill licensed and I have to do my
CLE by the end of the month, but...
I

am too.
And I just

got

a letter from the Supreme Court being like,
"You're licensed, but you don'thave an IOLTA account, so you
need to do some extra CLE."

I know.
But that's what happens whenpeople call you for legal advice.
And so, as much as these formulas canfeel like, "Oh, Lee, I can't believe
you're saying I need to use IRAC inthe real world" - well, when you
have a law license, whether or notyou are actively out there practicing
law, people call you for legal advice.
I don't know if your friendscall you for legal advice.

(19:18):
My family.
Somebody will call, right?
And the reality is, your advicecomes back to them in IRAC form.
It really does, because you're like,"Okay, here is the problem." And maybe
the rules sometimes, you're like, "I'vegot to do some research on that." But the
idea is that you're really breaking itdown for them in the same way, and then
what they really want to know is yourconclusion of, what options do they have?

(19:40):
And I think that can kind of softenthe blow a little bit about focusing
on doing this for these exams,because it's really just part of life.
It's how Supreme Courtopinions are written.
If you read Supreme Court opinions,take your highlighters, my
friends, and they IRAC that stuff.
At least the good ones.
Maybe not Marbury v.Madison, but the new ones.

(20:03):
I don't

know.
Yeah, now they do.

I was like, "I don't know." It's been a long time since I
read Marbury v. Madison, but I don'tknow that they were IRAC-ing that one.

Yeah, I don't know.
I'd have to read it again.

I'd have to read it.
It's been a long time, so I don'tremember that one off the top of my head.
So, I think that something thatcomes up for students in all exam
situations is, what do you do whenyou just don't know the rule, right?
You were talking about the importance ofneeding to learn these rules for the bar
exam, closed -book exams in law schoolrequire you to know these rules cold.

(20:35):
You spend all these hours memorizingthem, hopefully in element formats.
You've got mnemonics,you've got this and that.
Yet, sometimes you're in the room andthey might test something that wasn't
on your outlines - happened to me.
Or they might do somethingcompletely wacky, or you just
get anxiety and you just forget.

(20:56):
It definitely happens.
What do you think that students shoulddo when they think about rule statements,
with this acknowledgement that, "I mayshow up on the test and then there's
still going to be something I don't know"?
Yeah.
I'll start this

with a personal anecdote when I took bar exam.
So, I took Corporate Finance,I took BA. I did a lot of
business-related classes in law school.
So I was like, "Oh, I'm finefor Corporations on the bar
exam." I did not take the UBE.
I took Ohio before it went UBE.
So, we had a lot of state-specific,all kinds of things on there.
And my Corporations essay was aseven-part essay on voting trusts.

I don't even know what that is.

Right.

Now, I'm not licensed in Ohio, but I don't know what that is.

I don't even think that was Ohio-specific.
Don't quote me on that,because this was a while ago.
But I remember getting that essay on barexam day and being like, "You're joking.
This has to be a sick joke." And Iwent back after the fact and I was
like, "Did I learn this?" It was likethe tiniest little part of bar prep.
So, the reality is, you're not going tobe able to memorize every single rule.

(22:07):
And even sometimes subjects that you thinkyou're really solid in, you are not going
to get hit with an essay that is easyor functional for your knowledge base.
Now, that said, I did trymy best on that essay, and I
think I got like a three on it.
It was definitely one my lower examscores, but I got points because I used

(22:30):
the knowledge that I did have aboutcorporate law in general and just tried
to solve my way through the problem.
I don't remember which parts I madeup, to be quite honest with you.
But I definitely madeup a good part of it.
But, as I said, it was a seven-part essay.
So I broke it down into those seven,I gave it the structure, I tried to

(22:52):
do IRAC to the best capacity thatI could, and I got some points.
And so, if you do that, you make upwhat you need to make up, you write what
you know, and you just try your best.
The good thing about bar exam essaysis that because you are not answering
a multiple-choice question, whereit's either right or wrong, you

(23:14):
have some flexibility for partialcredit for things that are just
slightly off, to not be a zero.
And so, you give it your best.
But yes, make up what you don'tknow and work with what you do,
and you'll probably be surprised.
You know more than you think you know.

Yeah.
So, I have a similar story frommy bar, because they tested the
preemption of executive orders,which sounds like something we would
all talk about right now becauseit's it's like very in the news.
But this was back in the aughts,the late aughts, which this was not
being discussed widely at that time.

(23:52):
And there was a BARBRIlecturer at that time.
I don't even think Themis was doingprep at that point, or at least not
widely, when I was taking the bar.
But he had this thing where hewould say, "If you don't know it,
nobody knows it." That was his line.
And it was not in the outlines that mostof us were studying off of this law.
And so, we all got this question and halfof it was on the Fourth Amendment, which

(24:15):
is my favorite amendment, and so I hadplenty to say about the Fourth Amendment.
But the rest of it was on thisother thing that I had no idea.
And so, I'm just throwing in words.
I'm like, "Well, this is areasonableness standard, there's
full preemption." Any law that Iknow, I'm pulling something together.
And I don't know what I got on thescore, because California does not
release your scores if you pass.

(24:35):
So I can assume I justgot an amazing score.
Perfect.
Perfect.
100%.
100%. They did invite me to be agrader, so I had to do pretty well.
But I'm going to guess thatwas not my shining example.
But what was interesting and funny, isat the end, it was the end of our morning
session and I'm in this conferencehall with thousands... I mean, so many

(24:56):
people take the bar in California.
You'd be in this room withthousands and thousands of people.
Someone in the back screams, "If youdon't know it, nobody knows it!" And
the whole place cracks up laughing,because we'd all watched the same video

for bar

prep.

That's amazing.

It was amazing.
And so, what's funny is thatnow, of course, that law is
absolutely in the outlines becauseI have seen it over the years.
But almost everyone has this story thatthere's something that happens, right?
And so, the only thing that I think canreally lead you astray is when you give
up and you feel like you're focusingon this IRAC and you're saying, "I

(25:34):
have to hit all these things." Now,what will sink you is to write no rule.

I have seen that before (25:38):
"Well, I didn't know the rule, so I didn't
write anything." That's a terriblechoice, because if you write
something, even if it's kind ofgarbage, what if I was almost right?
I might get some of the points.
What if somebody's reading socarefully that they don't even
notice the part that's wrong?
I've seen it.
I've seen passing essaysthat have bad law on them.
And you need to say it with confidence.

(25:59):
You never want to say something like,"Well, I don't actually know the rule
for preemption of executive orders,but I'm going to just give it my
best shot." No, I was like, "Well,the Constitution is silent on this
topic, but..." I had plenty to say.
But you've got to do it with confidence,you've got to dress it up and make it look
like it knows what it's talking about.
But then you just want to give yourselfenough rule that you can do the rest

(26:21):
of the legal analysis, and you'regoing to get something for that.
And if you leave anything out orif you ignore an issue completely,
all you're doing is really invitingwhoever's grading your paper to
just not give you any points.
And that's always sad.
So, you've got to work it and justtake a deep breath and just do your
best, because you just never knowin this point collection game where

(26:43):
you can find some additional points.
And maybe your made-up ruleis so compelling that you
get quite a few points.
Or, like I said, I'msure I high scored that.
It's amazing I wasn't themodel answer for that question.
But in your case, you werementioning you got a three.
But a three is still prettygood, because the next one is a
five, it doesn't really matter.
You just need it not to be a two or a one.

I passed with plenty of room to spare.
And granted, that was pre-UBE, whenOhio had 12 essays, so there was a
little more wiggle room in the essays.
That said, you can fail an entireessay and still pass the bar exam if
your other scores are good enough.
So, getting a question thatyou are like, "I'm at a loss",

(27:29):
you should try, absolutely.
But you should also not assumeautomatically that question is going to
tank your ability to get a passing score.
I think that's importantfor people to remember.
A lot of students when they're studyingare like, "I'm afraid to turn in my
graded essays, because I know I'mnot ready to take them." And it's
like, how do you get better at it?
You practice.
And two, you can't have thatmentality on bar exam day.

(27:52):
You've got to be ready to just say,"Alright, I'm going to give it my best
shot, no matter what happens." And,like you said, you'll be surprised
at what you can pick up, points wise.
Because they're notgrading for perfection.
No bar exam grader is looking at essaysand saying, "This needs to have every
single thing available for it to get apassing score." That's not how it works.

(28:14):
If you look at model sample answersfrom bar exams, they often don't
even have every single... Unlessit's drafted specifically to be one
that gives you every single point.
But actual sample answers fromstudents, they're not perfect.
And they passed and they'rebeing used as model answers.
So, that should give youa little bit of hope.

Yeah.
I think that it's really an importantmindset to have in all exams that
you take, is that one bump, be ita rule or an issue you don't know
the answer to, you cannot give itany more power than it gets, right?
It gets one issue, andthen you've got to move on.
I think in the law school exam space,there were plenty of times on an

(28:56):
exam that you would reach somethingand be like, "I don't know, but I
think this is how I'm going to handleit." You just do your best, because
again, you're collecting points.
And what you don't want to do is justsay, "Well, there goes the exam. I
guess I'm done" and give up, becauseyou're leaving things on the table.
I remember taking myEvidence exam in law school.

(29:17):
I did not love Evidence, despite thefact that I do enjoy it now and have
taught it for many years, but I didn'tat the time just jive well with my
Evidence professor, and I was a superstressed 2L who was doing OCI, and
so it was just a recipe for disaster.
And I got that exam and I was like, "Thisis a mess." And I remember I decided to

(29:39):
take a break and I walked to the bathroomand I looked in the mirror and I was like,
"If you don't go back and do absolutelyeverything that you can do on that exam,
you might have to take this class again.
And you definitely don't want to takethis class again." That sounds worse
than going back and just doing thebest that I can with what I'm given.

(30:01):
And I did okay.
It was not my highest score by far.
No CALI awards for that Evidenceclass, but I got through it.
And I think that we all have tohave that kind of mentality in
the back of our pockets, like,"I'm not going to let this one go.
I'm going to fight through it.
I'm going to be resilient.
I'm going to do the best that I can." Andthen the chips will fall where they may.

Yeah.
I mean, law school's hard.
The bar exam is hard.
They are not meant to be a walk in thepark, and that's for a lot of reasons.
It shouldn't feel that easy.

Yeah.

I think that's really important.
Students get so nervous and scared.
And I was right there too.
It's very overwhelming sometimes, butlooking back now and having worked
with so many students over my time atThemis, I can see how much that fear
holds people back from performing aswell as they can, because there's a

(30:54):
lot of cognitive energy that is takenup by you being afraid and anxious.
I get it, anxiety is a very realthing, but the more that you can
do to bring that down and to thinkabout this from a practical, "Okay,
what is my goal?" You mentionedthat earlier: What is the goal here?
Who am I trying to communicate to?
What am I trying to do?

(31:14):
And think about it like a formula.
One of the ways I explain this tostudents who are struggling with essays
when they're studying for the bar examis, you're solving a math problem.
You are given an issue.
Well, you have to figure out whatthe issue is, but if you figure out
what the issue is and you have a rulethat applies to it, and then you are
doing all of the steps of a geometryproof to get to your conclusion.

(31:36):
And if you can take a step back andthink about it from that much more
logical, rational perspective, ittakes some of the fear out of it.
So, hopefully that helpssomebody listening to this.

Totally.
One thing I see often with students,both on law school exams and on the
bar, is that they get very excitedabout this idea that they can just
bullet point or make a list of thingsor scramble to write something out and
they'll get a whole bunch of points.
And there is a time and a place for that.
But I also really think it's importantwhen you think about IRAC, when you

(32:11):
think about analysis, and that's wherethe majority of your points come from,
is that you're really just wavingyour arms in front of the grader's
face and saying, "I am out of time, Ido not know what I'm doing, and this
is chaos." The chaos is upon us.
And so, I really encourage folks to thinkabout managing your time throughout.

(32:34):
Of course, you don't want to endup with an issue left, a big issue
that you don't have time for.
But you also want to say, "How can I justdo this as quickly as possible, without
waving my arms in front of the graderand saying I really have completely run
out of time?" Because if you just say"Conclusion" at the bottom and don't
say anything else, I think that's worsethan just not having a conclusion.

(32:54):
I don't know, what do you think?

I completely agree.
I think that you should treatthe bar exam or your law school
final exams as if you're giving anassignment to a partner at a law firm.
And yet, you're going to bestrapped for time sometimes
when you're doing your work.
That's just the nature of being a lawyer.
That's the nature law school.
How can you make it as professionalas possible within the time

(33:18):
constraints that you have?
And so, if you have time for a bulletlist, get it out there, get it on
the page and start organizing itwith the time that you have left.
You may not get through all ofit, but anything that you can do
to clean it up and polish it upis going to work in your favor.
I think that's good advicefor life in general.

Yeah, it's true.
It's true.
Well, we are almost out of time, butI do like to ask all our guests, if
you could give yourself one piece ofadvice about your own legal writing or
your exam writing, what would that be?

Ooh, that's a loaded question, because

are

a lot of things I wish I would have done differently.
One of the best things I did was goto one of my professors with an exam
that I did not love the grade I gotand say, "Please help me understand
where I went wrong here." And thatinteraction with the professor helped
shift my legal writing immensely.

(34:13):
So, I would say that is somethingI wish I would have done earlier
in my law school process.
And two is using supplements tohelp me figure out how to write.
So that could be the Themissupplements, and I promise you
that's not just a plug for Themis.
Once I found those when I was in lawschool, they were such a benefit to me.
But it can also be things like Examples& Explanations books, or other guides that

(34:38):
you can look at and say, "Okay, here'swhat a good IRAC response looks like",
and then you can work to model it.
Because when you're a 1L, especially whenyou're a 1L, but even later on, it's hard
for you to pull the idea of what somethingis supposed to look like out of thin air.
So, seeking out those resources thatcan help you figure out how to do this
so you're not trying to reinvent thewheel, I think is a great thing to do.

Yeah.
And I would piggyback on thatby going back to our Marbury vs.
Madison discussion.
One of the things that I think is hardwhen you're a 1L is you do spend a lot
of time reading really old cases, and Ithink that that feels like a disconnect
to the legal writing you're beingasked to do, even in your Legal Writing
class or eventually on your exams.
So, I found it was really helpfulfor me when I was working on my

(35:24):
legal writing, because shocker - Iwas not perfect to start.
I mean, I know that's hard to believe.

You're perfect now.
but

Oh, thank you.
Yes, I wasn't perfect when I startedand I had things I had to work on.
But one of the things for me was that whenI started reading more modern cases to
do legal research and writing projects, Istarted to see the more modern application
of the IRAC in legal opinions, and Iwas like, "Oh, this is easy." It's easy

(35:54):
to read, it's not that hard to write.
But I think that it's hard becausein the beginning you spend a lot
of time reading archaic stuff thatnobody writes like that anymore.
And so, if you're on the newer endof this journey and you're listening
to this podcast, download a SupremeCourt opinion maybe one that won't
make your blood boil, because I don'tthink it's good for your mental health.

Maybe one from like seven years

ago.
Yeah, I was like, maybenot one from recently.
But yeah, to all the Con Lawprofessors out there - whoo, I tell ya!

Yeah, that's

a tough

job at the moment.

Tough job right now.
But I do think it is interestingto read more modern cases.
And some classes kind of do that.
My Criminal Law professorwas interested in doing that.
I remember we read Lawrence v. Texas,which is like a 2000 or 2001 case.
It was interesting to readsomething that recent, because
you are reading so many old cases.
So, just look to what's aroundyou, look to more modern legal

(36:51):
writing, and also remember thatit's like a foreign language.
I have a friend who's an expat in Europe,and she always jokes.... She's Australian.
And she's like, "My in-laws have noidea how funny I am, because I'm not
very funny in French." She's like, "MyFrench good enough for me to be funny.
I am way funnier in English." And she'slike, "I don't think they know why my
husband's with me, because he thinksI'm so funny and they don't think I'm

(37:13):
that funny." I really love that becauseI think legal writing is the same.
In the beginning, it doesn'tsound like you, because
you're learning something new.
You have to give it time, and thenyou can develop your own technique
and your own kind of style to it.
But that's got to be onceyou are really good at it.
So,

Yeah.
And it's not that complicated.
It's something that's challengingto learn, but once you get over that
initial challenge, not only canyou make it your own and have a style
to it, it just gets a lot easier.
By the time you sit for the bar exam, ifyou've studied effectively, you'll be able
to glance at an essay prompt and you'llbe able to say, "Okay, immediately, here

(37:52):
is the rule I'm working with, and hereare the points." You'll be amazed at
how quickly you'll be able to go throughsomething that felt like an impossible
challenge to you two months before.
So, let that be a beacon of light asyou head towards finals or the bar exam.

Totally.
I love it.
That's a great, great point to end on.
Well, thank you so much fortaking time out of your travel
schedule to chat with us today.
If folks want to learn more about Themisand their resources for law students
and the bar exam, how do they do that?

So, on our website, ThemisBar.com, you can
find out about all of our resources.
And for students who are currently inlaw school, we offer free programs.
So, our Law School Essentials programshave video lectures, outlines,
practice questions, and practiceessays for all of the first-year
doctrinal topics and the upper level.
Not every single upper level bar testedcourse, but a good number of them.

(38:46):
And those are a way for you to just getsome extra guidance towards those, help
with the black-letter law, and thendo practice and review as you build
your outlines throughout the semester.
We also have a free MPRE course, andthen of course, our bar exam program.
So, everything you canfind out on our website.
We post lots of stuff on oursocials too, so check us out.

Alright.
Well, thanks so much.
Have a good rest of your day.

Thank you, Lee.
Always lovely to talk to you.

Today we would like to thank Themis Bar Review
for sponsoring this episode.
Remember, you can enroll nowwith our exclusive offer.
Save $900 on any July 2025 ThemisBar Review course using the
code LAWSCHOOLTB900 at checkout,valid through May 19th, 2025.

(39:36):
If you enjoyed this episode of theLaw School Toolbox podcast, please
take a second to leave a review andrating on your favorite listening app.
We'd really appreciate it.
And be sure to subscribeso you don't miss anything.
If you have any questions orcomments, please don't hesitate
to reach out to myself or Alisonat lee@lawschooltoolbox.com or
alison@lawschooltoolbox.com.
Or you can always contactus via our website contact

(39:57):
form at LawSchoolToolbox.com.
Thanks for listening, and we'll talk soon!

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}492: Legal Writing and IRAC (w/Rebecca Petrilli from Themis Bar Review)

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

492: Legal Writing and IRAC (w/Rebecca Petrilli from Themis Bar Review)

Stuff You Should Know