What is the CREAC method?
The key to excellent legal writing is using the CREAC method. CREAC is an acronym that stands for Conclusion, Rule, Explanation, Application, and Conclusion. It is a systematic way to dissect legal issues and come to a reasoned conclusion. CREAC is a vital component of legal writing because it creates structure and improves persuasion in your written work. Every CREAC legal analysis begins with a conclusion. Below is an example of a CREAC argument:
Conclusion: The plaintiff should win on its breach of contract claim against the defendants.
Rule: Under both California and federal common law, a contract exists when there is (1) an offer and acceptance, (2) sufficient consideration , and (3) mutual consent by the contracting parties.
Explanation: Here, the plaintiff clearly made an offer and the defendants subsequently accepted the terms of the offer. Further, there was sufficient consideration for the contract because the plaintiff agreed to provide services to the defendants in exchange for payment. The defendants’ consent to the terms was further evidenced when the defendants paid the plaintiff for services rendered. Because all three elements of a contract are present here, a contract existed.
Application: Additionally, the defendants failed to fulfill their contractual obligations by not fully compensating the plaintiff.
Conclusion: The plaintiff should prevail on its breach of contract claim against the defendants.
Advantages of Using CREAC for Legal Analysis
Incorporating the CREAC method into legal writing brings multiple benefits to lawyers and their audiences. Primarily, it ensures a clarity of message. Because the format requires clear statements of the rule, its application and case support, it ultimately forces a more precise analysis of the law and allows for more straightforward argument construction. Readers of CREAC-based legal writing can jump to the heart of a brief or pleading, and with minimal lapses in logic, understand the connection between the facts and the desired result.
CREAC also requires thorough legal analysis. It can be tempting for lawyers to focus solely on what they believe to be the most persuasive rule or application of law. Writing in CREAC format forces – and even requires – an attorney to explore other applicable rules. This leads to a better understanding of the shades of a particular law, which in turn means that the lawyer will better understand possible counterarguments. Once their opponent’s arguments are well understood, the lawyer is in a much better position to decide how to limit the impact of the argument on a case and how to distinguish it from the facts at issue.
One of the biggest advantages of writing in CREAC format is that it’s especially helpful in lengthy opinions or briefs, as it helps the reader sort through complex legal arguments. A common court structure of first laying out a rule of law, then applying it to the specific facts of a case, can lead to pages and pages of back-and-forth in deciding what rule is applicable and whether the facts meet the rule. In CREAC, the court first states the applicable law, and then lays out a clear application and analysis of how the law and the facts together lead to a given decision. Having the legal conclusion up front makes clear what the court believes the law is and allows the reader to judge if that outcome is appropriate based on the facts of the case.
CREAC Writing Process: A Step-by-Step Guide
Once you have your thesis and some sort of structure in place, you should do some writing. One good game plan is to create a first draft following the outline, essentially using the outline to help you finish the first draft. Having the outline is an invaluable tool for drafting, and you can probably just turn that outline into the skeleton of a draft. You should be aware of the elements of CREAC that each part of the argument has to include. The sections of CREAC are: C = Conclusion, R = Rule, E = Evidence, A = Analysis, and C = Conclusion. The rule section addresses the rule of law issue that you are arguing about. The evidence section includes the facts showing why you should win. The analysis section is the heart of the argument. You need to convince the reader why you should be correct. C stands for closing the deal. It is basically the conclusion that rounds out the argument by tying everything together and giving a final perspective.
The first thing to do is start the CREAC process. The CREAC process is like an outline except there are different rules to follow. When you draft using the CREAC method, for example, the first impression has to be the conclusion. That is not the first thing people usually think to do, but in CREAC the conclusion comes first. The reason that it is important to have the conclusion first in CREAC is that it allows the reader to know up front what the essential point of the legal argument is about. If it is not the first thing in CREAC, your argument is not coherent. An example of this might be: "The defendant is guilty.". An example of the opposite of this is: "Defendant is not guilty of aggravated battery.". The second example actually makes the reader ask himself: "for what charge is defendant not guilty?", whereas the first example invites the reader to recognize that the defendant is guilty and to read further to find out why. The next step is to write out the rule. You have already identified the rule and have supported it with your reasoning. Your job now is to present the supporting argument. It should be something like: "The applicable law is statute M which provides that a person is guilty of aggravated battery if he (has a specific characteristic) and he (other specific characteristic). The defendant does not because he (sets out the characteristics).". What follows this is the evidence. The evidence section as it is shown in CREAC is a factual discussion meant to further underscore the reader’s understanding of your argument. Following the example above, this would look like: "Defendant, who was diagnosed with 30 protheses broken bones, is not qualified to be called a menace to society under statute M.". The most important part of the entire CREAC process is the analysis. Without this part, CREAC paragraphs fall apart. The analysis section is sort of like a fact sheet explaining how each fact of the case meets the requirements of the rule. This is as follows: "Defect is not a danger to society because…". The reason that analysis is the most important part of CREAC is because it gives the writer’s voice. The analysis helps to expand the rule and give the rule more nuance. The writer has something to either add or take away from the rule that modifies the rule in some way. If the lawyer did the analysis section correctly, it will have infectious energy. In other words, your enthusiasm for the legal conclusion will grow on the reader, at least for a little while.
Sample CREAC: A Practical Example
Fact pattern: Alex, a state prison inmate, is under food service contract to a private company that provides all meals to the prison. Prison medical staff became concerned about Alex’s eating behavior after his weight dropped substantially below his pre-incarceration body mass index. This weight loss was consistent with the symptoms of anorexia nervosa. The contract awarded to Food Services, Inc. required that it report any suspected mental health issues to the warden and allow medical personnel to conduct a mental health examination on request.
This scenario calls for the CREAC analytical method.
Conclusion
A state-contracted private food service provider is a "state actor" for purposes of the Eighth Amendment; thus, a prisoner can state a claim against the food services company for deliberate indifference to his medical problems in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Rule
When a private entity performs a government function in an area traditionally performed by a state, the private entity may be acting as an agent of the state. An entity can be considered a state actor if the entity is operating as an instrumentality of the state. When a prisoner is receiving medical treatment, the prison provides the medical care that is the basis for an inmate’s Eighth Amendment claim. When an inmate is receiving treatment, the Eighth Amendment requires that the treatment be adequate to meet the standard of care of doctors in a free society. Because a prisoner has no access to outside medical care, prison medical staff must act as agents of the state to provide adequate medical treatment.
Explanation
Here, Food Services, Inc. is providing food services to the state. Inmates have no alternative source of food when they are incarcerated. Thus , maintenance of the prison’s food services is a traditional government function. Furthermore, Food Services, Inc. is under contract with the state to operate the prison’s food services. The state here has delegated its responsibility and duty to provide free meals to the prisoners over to Food Services, Inc.
With that delegation of duty, the state has ceded its responsibility to provide adequate medical treatment to the state’s employees at Food Services. Prison medical staff are also state employees. Thus, Food Services is a state actor with respect to implementation of prison meal policies. Accordingly, lack of adequate medical treatment falling below the standards of a free society renders the state and the food services contractor liable under federal law for inadequate treatment of prisoners’ medical conditions.
Application
Here, medical staff have identified a prisoner’s medical condition as potentially life-threatening, and Food Services has acknowledged that the prisoner has lost weight that is attributable to his existing medical condition. Food Services, Inc. has a contractual obligation to allow inspection of prisoners’ mental and physical conditions. Food Services, Inc. failed to alert medical personnel that the prisoner’s condition was worsening. Furthermore, Food Services, Inc. failed to allow medical staff to examine the prisoner and investigate the cause and extent of the prisoner’s worsened medical condition. Such failure in duties constitutes deliberate indifference to medical care of the prisoner and thus states a claim as a state actor liable under the Eighth Amendment.
Conclusion
The prison inmate participating in this hypothetical fact pattern would be entitled to relief under federal law against both the state and Food Services, Inc.
Troubleshooting common CREAC issues
Some writers struggle with the rule part, especially with being able to articulate it and with the application part. A common shortcoming is the failure to accurately extract the key elements of the rule, which leads to the reader being unsure about what the rule really means. It also can lead to the writer’s discussion of the application being a mere restatement of the rule or its elements without adequate analysis.
The fix: check to see if your rule statement is clear and taut. Test its precision by checking whether you are repeating the rule but using different words and phrases in the explanation; if you are, discuss something else in their place. Also get feedback from your intended audience. Would they be clear on what the rule says and what it means? If not, reword it.
Avoiding a reliance on pattern language and a formulaic approach to the CR section. Too many writers rely on language patterns when writing the CR section. While doing so gives them a formulaic approach, it requires them to use so many words to convey the legal rule that their analysis is limited. The CR sections tend to be too long and lack originality of expression.
The fix: find the right CR approach that works for you and your audience. Test each of them to see if the approach works for those you want to reach and for the facts you are facing. Do the approaches manifest themselves in the writing you produce? The system may work; therefore, keep it.
Readability problems due to the fact that there is too much analysis crammed into a single CR section and thus lose the reader. Or the writer becomes so intent on explaining the case law relied upon that the reader cannot discern the rules, meaning that the writer has become the focus of the CR. Or the writer adds too many opinions regarding the meanings of critical aspects of the case law relied upon, which means that the reader is now becoming annoyed with the writer for not explaining what the law means.
The fix: examine your CR section, focusing on these three areas. Then shorten your writing and edit your prose, keeping in mind those three areas. Also ask yourself whether the comment is related to the proposition you are discussing.
A rule statement that is too broad or too specific (i.e., words or phrases in your CR section serving as red flags that prompt the reader to take issue with your analysis because your rule statement covers more than is appropriate or is too narrow to be useful). As a result, the reader may become focused on your faulty language instead of what the CR section is intended to convey.
The fix: look for an appropriate-sized rule statement. If a rule is too broad, use searches and queries to find the right rule. If it’s too narrow, search for cases with "headnote" summaries; those usually identify a right-sized rule.
When to Leverage Tech with CREAC
Innovations in technology can help streamline the legal writing process by providing advanced research tools and sophisticated software that can increase accuracy and efficiency among practitioners.
Research Tools
Online legal research programs such as Lexis, Westlaw or Fast Case allow for a much more efficient search of cases and statutes than those done solely by digest or even hard back books. These search engines allow a user to narrow down results quickly and effectively. They also provide citations for all of the cases found. All lawyers should understand how to use these programs effectively and efficiently and should have no need to look up a case by page number in a treatise .
Drafting
When provided with a template, case management software such as Clio’s "Form Builder" or PracticeMaster provide a case management program that can generate important letters, pleadings and other documents with only a few keystrokes. This helps eliminate the problem of lawyers having to reinvent the wheel for every pleading.
Edit Tools
Programs such as WordRake allow a legal writer to run a word processing document through an editing program focused on clarity and efficiency. Since the mechanics of legal writing and the rules of CREAC require a particular flow of information on a page, tools like this can be particularly useful.