IRAC... or DRAC [Eugene]

I am very glad John brought up IRAC. Although, I have not started school yet, it is something that I am already very familiar with. The good people over at Law Preview warned my class two weeks ago that all of our law schools would try to indoctrinate us into the legal analysis method  that is IRAC. It seems like Catholic has already begun, and its only the third day.

To be completely honest, the Law Preview instructors did not have much nice to say about IRAC. In fact, they flat out thumbed their noses at it. To quote the Law Preview text book: 

Praised for its simplicity, IRAC has helped hundreds of thousands of students survive their law school exams. But if you are interested in doing more than just surviving your exams - if you want to conquer them - then you will see how using this methodology is far too limiting for students who want to earn a top spot in their class

Ouch! Law Preview instead recommends their own equally cheesy acronym for law students wishing to do legal analysis: DRAC. This supposedly superior approach lists the 4 steps of analysis as 1.)Dispute, 2.) Rule 3.) Arguments, 4.) Conclusion. The key difference here is in step 3. In IRAC, so they say, simply applying the legal issue to the case you are discussing unnecessarily limits the scope of your analysis, whereas laying out all the potential arguments that each party could possibly make in a dispute (the DRAC way) will broaden your analysis to include not only factual issues, but also legal and public policy issues as well, and therefore give you a more complete and more correct answer. 

Yeah, whatever all that means! However, DRAC is essentially the big scoop that Law Preview offers its students. So for anyone out there who is planning on attending law school in '09 or later and was thinking of taking Law Preview, I just saved you $1,200. 

 

23 Years Later [Eugene]

Unlike my friend John, it would be completely disingenuous for me to say that I have wanted to be a lawyer my entire life. In fact as late as last year at this time, law school was not even on my radar screen. I graduated from George Washington University in '07 (BA International Affairs) with thoughts of high paying jobs and economic self-sufficiency on the brain. It was quite a rude awakening for me when I hit the job market in DC during the summer of '07. There were plenty of opportunities, particularly in the non-profit area, but none were high paying or even offered a path to a high paying job in the future. It did not take very long working under these conditions that I realized that I had to improve my marketability. Hello, law school!!! 

For me, law school is a necessary evil. If you aren't going to go to law school and you don't have friends in high places, there is just not a lot of economic opportunity out there for humanities/social science majors. Its sad, but its true.

As I entered the admissions process and began reading about law school, my interest and desire to study the law definitely increased. After taking the Law Preview class at NYU last week, and beginning to do my initial course readings for NYLS, I am officially excited about beginning this endeavor. I have certainly come a long way in this last 6-8 months in terms of my intellectual desire to go to law school, and my conviction that I would like to practice law for my career. But unlike John, I definitely did not start here. 

From what I have heard from friends/contacts, it seems that most law schools have begun orientation and classes this week. NYL, however, does not start until next Monday, 8/18. I will have more then.