Please turn in all your work on one document. Homework is credit/no credit. Only work that shows analytical effort will receive credit.
Reading material can be found here: Textbook Download Textbook
Please brief the cases in IRAC format. If you are not familiar with IRAC format, please connect with me and we will schedule an IRAC workshop.
Your cases may have more than one issue that you need to IRAC. Please prepare a separate IRAC per issue. This text teaches through cases, so by preparing IRAC briefs, you are essentially outlining the material and engaging in active learning.
Please choose two of the questions following each case to answer in paragraph format. Answer the questions fully and thoroughly.
Submit in one document. Each case IRAC is worth 2 points, each problem is worth 1 point.
1. Case IRAC 1 brief followed by answers to two chapter problems
2. Case IRAC 2 brief followed by answers to two chapter problems
Turnitin will automatically check your work for originality. You may copy the rule of law verbatim. All other work (issue statement, analysis, conclusion) must be your own.) Homework with an originality score over 50% will not receive credit.
SOME NOTES ABOUT THE IRAC METHOD:
You have all learned to IRAC from various professors using various styles. All styles are acceptable to me so long as you articulate a clear understanding of what the case is about and why it’s important.
The last page of the syllabus provides IRAC instructions.
A great issue statement follows this formula:
Issue = (party names) (name of the rule of law from the “Rule” section”) (a key fact or short factual statement)
Here is an example: Osborne v. Power (Links to an external site.)
Facts and Procedural History: Osborne created a Christmas light display that included over 1,600,000 lights and structures depicting Mickey Mouse driving a train, reindeer, sleighs, and a carousel. Thousands of people came to visit the attraction. Neighbors, plaintiffs, complained about left over trash, traffic hazards, visitors parking on their front lawns, excessive noise and light, and inhibited access to their properties.
Issue: Can the homeowners recover from Osborne for the nuisance and trespass to their properties caused by the Christmas light display?
Rules: Trespass is the 1) intentional 2) interference with a property owner’s 3) reasonable enjoyment of their land.
Nuisance is the 1) unreasonable 2) interference with 3) a landowner’s use and enjoyment of their property.
The homeowners, plaintiffs, claim Osborne owes damages for the disturbances caused as a result of his light display. Visitors to the neighborhood entered upon the property owned by the plaintiffs where they discarded trash. These visitors willfully interfered with the homeowners’ enjoyment and ease of use of their property. Osborne’s display included over 1.5 million lights. It is reasonable that over 1.5 million lights would create a disturbance to neighboring property owners. The landowners were not able to enjoy their property as it was disturbed by the uninvited visitors.
Osborne claims he does not owe damages to the homeowners. He constructed the light display on his property. He argues he is allowed to do as he pleases with the structures on his property. He claims he is not responsible for the visitors’ actions.
Conclusion: The court rules in favor of the plaintiffs. The light display created a nuisance in the neighborhood in addition to providing ease for the trespass of visitors on the properties.