Can anyone help me showing the steps in IRAC method how to solve a particular problem?
closed as too broad by Pat W.♦, David Siegel, Nij, Tim Lymington, Dale M♦ May 13 at 5:11
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
You don't really "solve" a problem with IRAC. It is a rubric for summarizing cases and writing about how a legal issue was or should be resolved.
As noted by @Putvi it stands for issue, rule, analysis and conclusion. It is common when writing a court opinion, or summarizing a case.
For example, you first state the issue:
Does the statute of frauds bar claims for promissory estoppel to establish who owns real property?
Then to state the rule:
Promissory estoppel can overcome the statute of frauds for many purposes, but not for purposes of lender liability or conveyances of real property.
Then to provide analysis:
Promissory estoppel has been used to substitute reliance for consideration and other formal requirements such as the requirement of a writing in many contexts, but the lender liability statute of frauds was enacted with a broader application than the traditional statute of frauds and the statute of frauds for conveyances of real property is definitional in nature since a conveyance of real property doesn't have a meaning in the absence of a deed or other instrument of conveyance. Since determining who owns real estate and not just who is obligated to transfer it in the future necessarily involves a conveyance, the exception to the promissory estoppel exception to the statute of frauds applies.
Finally, you state the conclusion:
Therefore, the statute of frauds bars claims for promissory estoppel to establish who owns real property.
IRAC is a tool used for communicating legal concepts and conclusions, not for reaching those conclusions.
Usually, the first stage of research is that you are presented with a fact pattern from which you have to "spot issues" and you may need to do legal research to use terminology that will be helpful and accurate to determine what the exact issue you want to resolve is and what the legal rule that applies to the case is. This often involves significant analysis prior to stating the rule or defining the issue.
Also, it isn't uncommon in adversary practice to start with a conclusion, and see if you can find a way to describe the issue, rule and analysis that will lead to that conclusion.
It would also be common to ask a junior attorney or law clerk to IRAC a large pile of cases to allow the senior attorney to focus in on which ones matter more quickly.
IRAC stands for Issue, Rule, Analysis, and Conclusion. Here is a pdf that lists what you should put in each part. https://www.csun.edu/sites/default/files/IRAC%20ANALYSIS_Saunders.pdf