Legal writing requires structured reasoning to ensure clarity, coherence, and persuasiveness. This study analyzes the role of structured models in legal writing and introduces commonly used frameworks such as IRAC, CREAC, and CRAC. By examining their characteristics, advantages, and applicability, the study highlights the importance of selecting appropriate structures in legal research and argumentation. The findings contribute to improving the quality of legal writing in academic and professional contexts.
Trường Đại học Luật Hà Nội (2021). Giáo trình Xây dựng văn bản pháp luật. Nhà xuất bản Tư pháp, Hà Nội.
2.
Laura P.Graham (2014). Why-RAC? Revisiting the Traditional Paradigm for Writing About Legal Analysis, Kansas Law Review, 63.
3.
Francine Sherman, Jane Gionfriddo and Joan Blum Point/Counterpoint (1995). Use of IRAC-type Formulas - Desirable or Dangerous?. Legal writing institute, 10(1), November 1995.
4.
Diane B. Kraft (2015). CREAC in the Real World. University of Kentucky, Cleveland State Law Review, 63(3), 567-597.
5.
Otto Stockmeyer. It's all about IRAC, Cooley Law school. Available at https://cooley.edu/blog/its-all-about-irac.
6.
Kaplan R.B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education, Language Learning, 16, 1&2.
7.
Kristen K. Robbins (2003). Paradigm Lost: Recapturing Classical Rhetoric to Validate Legal Reasoning. Vermont Law Review, 27.
