What is FIRAC?
FIRAC is a five-part structure for briefing a case: Facts, Issue, Rule, Analysis, Holding. It is IRAC with the facts separated out — a small change that makes a big difference in your first year.
The facts the court leaned on — not every fact in the opinion. If a fact never appears in the analysis, it does not belong here.
The legal question the court had to answer, phrased as a question. Every good issue statement makes the rule’s scope obvious.
The black-letter law the court applied. Quote it if you can; paraphrase if you must.
The court’s application of the rule to the facts. This is the section professors grade hardest, because it is the reasoning.
The rule the case now stands for, in one sentence. Not the disposition (“affirmed”); the takeaway.
FIRAC vs IRAC vs CREAC
IRAC drops the facts — fine for a bar-style multiple choice question, weak for a common-law brief where the outcome turned on which facts mattered. CREAC (Conclusion, Rule, Explanation, Application, Conclusion) is what legal-writing programs use for memos and briefs to a reader who wants the answer up front. FIRAC is the one you want for classroom briefing in your first two years.
A worked example — a torts negligence case
Take a straightforward duty-of-care case. Here is what each section looks like when done right:
F. Defendant left a hose running near a public sidewalk in freezing weather. Plaintiff slipped on the resulting ice and broke a wrist.
I. Did the defendant owe a duty of care to a passerby to prevent a foreseeable icy sidewalk?
R. A landowner owes a duty of reasonable care to prevent foreseeable harm to persons lawfully on adjacent public property.
A. The court applied the rule to these facts by asking whether ice on a public sidewalk in freezing weather was a foreseeable result of leaving a hose running. It held that it was, and that ordinary care required turning off the hose.
H. A landowner’s duty of reasonable care extends to foreseeable hazards created on adjacent public property.
Where students trip up
- Copy-pasting procedural history into F instead of the outcome-relevant facts.
- Merging R and A into one paragraph. Keep them separate — R is the law, A is the court applying it.
- Writing H as “the court affirmed.” The disposition is not the holding.
FAQ
What does FIRAC stand for?
Facts, Issue, Rule, Analysis, Holding. It’s a five-section structure for briefing a court opinion.
How is FIRAC different from IRAC?
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is a writing formula for practice exams. FIRAC adds an explicit Facts section — critical in first-year courses where the outcome turns on which facts the court leaned on.
Should I use FIRAC or CREAC for a legal writing memo?
Use CREAC (Conclusion, Rule, Explanation, Application, Conclusion) for memos and briefs written for a reader who wants the answer first. Use FIRAC for classroom case briefs, where the goal is to understand the opinion rather than persuade.
How long should a FIRAC brief be?
A landmark case might fill a full page. A brief mention in the syllabus might warrant four sentences. If every brief is the same length, you’re not making judgments — and making judgments is what the exam tests.
Do I have to write the Holding in one sentence?
Yes. If you can’t say it in one sentence, you don’t yet know what the case stands for. The one-sentence version is the one you’ll paraphrase on the exam.
Try it in Scriba
Highlight passages F, I, R, A, or H directly in the Reader. Each tag drops into the matching section of the brief, anchored back to the source text. Free during your trial.
Start briefing