Home Introduction

Introduction

Identifying the Accurate Legal Rules

Identifying the Accurate Legal Rules

Identifying the accurate legal rules of a given legal proceeding seems like an obvious element to legal analysis and argument, but it must be remembered that the legal system is a vast organism, comprising numerous categories and jurisdictions, and is always in an ongoing state of flux due to changes in interpretation facilitated by arguments and precedents. Enacting any legal action involves an accurate identification of the rules of law applicable to a situation, because inaccurate provision of an argument on the wrong rule of law will invalidate the argument immediately, regardless of how convincing or supported the argument is.
 
Again, this may seem like a fairly basic means of which to base an action, and in many regards, it is. Sometimes, the determination of a legal action could be a simple as viewing a law and determining that there is ground to pursue a legal action because the law has been violated. 
However, where it can become somewhat tricky is through the determination of legal precedents, where interpretations of a law can have been established through a pre-existing court case, and that interpretation has superseded the written law, meaning that the legal action may be invalid or need to be mended based on the new precedent. “Clashes of precedent” in these situation are not uncommon, where two sides of a persuasive legal argument can use differing precedents to argue for their interpretation of the law, at which point it is up to the court to determine which law has greater validity (usually it is a judge would make the determination).
 
Complicating these terms further is that the legal system is broken into numerous different sections and subsections, namely between criminal and civil law, and within those into numerous different subcategories. 
Within criminal law, understanding the rule of law can mean making a determination of the nature of law that has been violated, such as whether an action that led to a death was either negligence or falls under the auspices of homicide. In civil law, this could involve deciding whether an action is applicable under the rules of tort law, like malpractice, or under contract or even statute law.
It is in these determinations of applicable laws that the process of legal argument and analysis becomes incredibly difficult and complex, and it is for this reason most legal firms and organizations with legal departments often have a support teams of paralegals, whose job it is to research legal rules and rulings, and provide them to the lawyers who oversee them, who then determine if the argument is worth following up on. 
Legal briefs are then compiled, which consist of complex written arguments that have to often be as dialectical a possible, meaning they must account for counterarguments, reinterpretations, and misinterpretations that can undermine a legal argument. Therefore, legal arguments become complex means by which all loopholes have to be closed and sealed before savvy attorneys and their legal staff can present them to any legal body, either to a court or opposing legal organization.

What You Should Know About the Study of Law

What You Should Know About the Study of Law

When going into a specialization such as law, it must be understood that the practice of law has no similarities to the “legal entertainment” broadcasted on television. Predominantly, it is not based on courtroom theatrics, investigation of crimes, various forms of drama, or a certain level of glamor. It is based on arguments, and generally not of a verbal nature, but of a written one, unless proceeding to trial. The study of law is one predicated entirely on research, and then the ability to use and apply that research to provide a strong argument for your legal point of view. 
 
Laws entails more than just being able to read and understand a collective set of rules, the writing in its own is embedded with heavy vocabulary and legal terms which may differentiate from the same terms, with another use. The law is always changing as a result of legal reinterpretations by the courts, and through the enactment of new pieces of legislation by governing bodies. It is always expanding, always evolving, and always being challenged. 
 
This is when research becomes key to the study of law, research forms the basis of nearly all arguments, providing support and conjecture to mechanics of any thesis or central point. Any argument must be based on more than just the reading of a law, as well as legal precedents that effect the determination of that law. Legal arguments at their core, are opinions which are based upon evidence that can be physical or testimonial, but also supported by preexisting rhetoric, in the forms of others’ opinions and arguments; especially when they have been found to have been argued successfully elsewhere (this forms the foundation of the importance of precedent).
 
The extent by which laws are classified are also vast, and it is rare that any individual practices outside of his realm of legal expertise. Generally, the classifications of law breaks down to two main categories, criminal and civil. Criminal law pertains to laws that govern behavior in society, where offenses to the law are viewed as offenses to the state, and civil law, which pertains to disagreements between two parties that must be remedied through legal recourse.
 
It is due to these complexities that have made the legal profession that is generally so lucrative in real terms for many people, and so consistent in its ability to be employable. It’s what makes the study of the law so rewarding, in many respects, because its rewards must undeniably be earned through study and dedication.

An Introduction to the Study of Law

An Introduction to the Study of Law

Introduction to the Study of Law:
 
The analysis of facts forms the groundwork for which any legal argument can be undertaken, as it involves ascertaining the ability of evidence, whether it is physical or testimonial, to be able to determine, in the eyes of the law, provable facts upon which any legal decision must be made. Identifying the rule of law that is relevant in a given situation is vital to successful completion of a legal argument, and is far more complicated a process than one would initially imagine.
The means by which legal reporting is completed also varies not only the nature of the argument, but the means and arena which that argument will be made part of the public record.
 
The term “legal analysis” is one that can be applied broadly across the entire legal spectrum, but it is based off the concrete understanding that the application and use of law is based almost entirely on interpretation. Laws vary across the spectrum of criminal, civil, corporate, or political law, and vary within its many categories in complexity. A law could be a simple as a sentence or as long as a book. All laws are predicated on finding a consensus on how they are to be interpreted, and sometimes this calls for arguments to be made that support a particular interpretation, which is the process of legal argument. When a legal action has been undertaken by a party, it is based on an interpretation of the law, which has been reached at and supported by legal analysis….
 

Analyzing the Facts:
 
At the fundamental level of legal analysis, the importance lies within the facts as they pertain to legal arguments. Facts represent the groundwork that forms the concrete basis by which any legal action can be undertaken. A fact, at its simplest definition, is something real, because it is established as having actually happened, it maintains a concrete existence, or because it can be established as the finding of a concrete existence. While facts, in layman’s terms, represent something black and white, or as simple as true or false, in legal analysis, facts are something that have to be presented, both through interpretations of a law, in combination with evidence.
Identifying the Accurate Legal Rules:
 
Identifying the accurate legal rules of a given legal proceeding seems like an obvious element to legal analysis and argument, but it must be remembered that the legal system is a vast organism, comprising numerous categories and jurisdictions. It is always in an ongoing state of flux, due to changes in interpretation facilitated by arguments and precedents. Enacting any legal action involves an accurate identification of the rules of law applicable to a situation, because inaccurate provision of an argument on the wrong rule of law will invalidate the argument immediately, regardless of how convincing or supported the argument is. Complicating these terms further is that the legal system is broken into numerous different sections and subsections, namely between criminal and civil law, and within those into numerous subcategories and classifications…
Application of the Legal Rules:
 
The means by which legal rules are applied occurs through many different avenues, nearly all of which are dependent upon the nature of the applicable law. As a typically rule, the two major categories of criminal law and civil law are privy to two different forms of oversight.                   
 
Reporting Results:
 
The means by which the results of a legal argument are reported depend entirely on the nature of the legal analysis, or the argument that is presented. In predictive legal analysis, the results of a finding are usually published in either a scholarly or legal trade journal, one whose audience is focused entirely toward the legal community as a contribution to the public record. In the case of persuasive legal arguments, the results of the findings of the arguments are written in the form of a legal decision, which is written by the court. The form with which this is rendered is determined entirely by the nature of the legal proceedings. An important difference to note, however, is that in predictive analysis, the results are reported by the individual or group reporting the argument, while in persuasive analysis, the results are nearly always written by an individual or group that has had to be persuaded by that argument…

Legal Analysis Explained

Legal Analysis Explained

The term “legal analysis” is one that can be applied broadly across the entire legal spectrum, but it is basis is found in the concrete understanding that the application and use of law is based almost entirely on interpretation. Laws vary across the spectrum of criminal, civil, corporate, or political law, and vary within its many categories in complexity. 
A law could be a simple as a sentence or as long as a book. On the other hand, laws are predicated on finding a consensus on how they are to be interpreted, and sometimes this calls for arguments to be made that support a particular interpretation, which is the process of legal argument. When a legal action has been undertaken by a party, it is based on an interpretation of the law, which has been reached at and supported by legal analysis.
 
The tools used to analyze the law, are as numerous as they are complex. Like any form of discourse, arguments are generally supported by existing arguments as much as they are by reading of written law. These existing arguments are called precedents, and they are usually based on decisions made upon existing court cases which involved interpretation and reinterpretation of the law as a means of establishing a means by which to render a decision.  
In the case of the Supreme Court, their form of judicial review tries to determine whether an interpretation of a law brought before the Court can be interpreted under the United States Constitution. In the case of a law being found in violation of the Constitution or in support of it, the Court renders a decision supporting their finding. That decision then can be used as one form of precedent, though precedents can be established at all levels of the court, not only on the highest court, provided that a higher court has not already invalidated that decision.
 
Legal analysis does not only happen in terms that involve specific legal action (though it is these legal actions alone that can establish precedents), but also enters in legalistic discourse through academic means, which can also be cited to support legal arguments (though they carry significantly less weight than precedents). Generally, this form of legal analysis is called predictive analysis, since it is not based on a legal matter with which it plays a direct part, but are based on presenting hypothetical interpretations. When the matter of legal analysis is based specifically on an existing matter that requires the arguing of a legal point, this is called persuasive analysis.
 
Generally, the practice of law should be scene as the practice of argument, with legal analysis being seen as the means by which an argument is proposed, constructed, and supported either to 

Analyzing the Facts Through Legal Analysis

Analyzing the Facts Through Legal Analysis

At the fundamental level of legal analysis is the importance of facts as they pertain to a legal argument. Facts represent the groundwork that form the concrete basis by which any legal action can be undertaken. A fact, in its simplest form, is anything that has information relevant to its existence.
 
 
 
Evidence represents any material that can be used to support fact, though until they have been bolstered by a legal interpretation, they do not themselves represent facts. Facts ultimately represent the ideas that have been supported or unsupported by evidence. While in many practical cases, facts and evidence may appear to be ultimately identical, it is important to understand that in legal proceedings, they represent two different things. An important difference is that evidence is open to interpretation, while fact is something that is determined to have happened through the successful completion of a legal argument, usually in the eyes of a court of law.
 
 
 
Analyzing the facts of the case involves examining what evidence can be supported to a legal argument, and then use that information as the basis of a legal argument. The evidence that supports facts must then be applicable as validating the legal elements being argued.
 
 
 
An example of this commonly occurs in criminal situations. Say a prosecutor is faced with needing to determine if someone committed a murder by firearm. They have the firearm and the suspect, and they must determine whether the suspect used the gun to commit the murder. 
 
 
 
Of course, all evidence may not be so obvious as what has been presented in the example, and therefore may be open to contrary interpretations and reinterpretations. Say in a case of civil law, where a plaintiff accuses a defendant of having polluted a water supply and causing illness amongst a population. They present as evidence proof of what they say is contaminated water and medical opinions that the people became ill because of it. The defendant’s side could bring in experts to counter those opinions, arguing that the amount of pollution is not substantial and that medical effects were not caused by the pollution. It then becomes the duty of the court which interpretation of the evidence determines actual fact.
 
 
 
As can be seen, facts are crucial to the undertaking of any action, and their ability to be established is directly linked to the success of any legal argument, making them not only important as the end result of a proceeding, but at the outset as well.
Advertisement