When you read cases for class, the legally significant facts are often an important take away. The same is true whenever you read a fact pattern whether it appears in a legal writing assignment or an exam. Legally significant facts are central to effective analysis. Without them, you cannot apply a rule, compare one case to another, or predict how a court might decide. Not every fact in a case or hypothetical serves the same purpose. Facts come in several types and learning to tell them apart is a skill that grows with practice. There are four types of facts we will discuss here.
There are contextual facts. These facts set the scene. They may tell you who the parties are, where and when events took place, and how the dispute arose. They help the story make sense but they usually do not change the legal outcome.
There are red herring facts. These facts are intended to distract you. They may be emotionally compelling or simply placed where they draw your attention yet they have no real bearing on the legal issue. Sometimes they obscure the facts that do matter. Red hearings are especially common in exam hypotheticals. Professors may include them to test whether you can separate what is relevant from what only seems relevant. A plaintiff’s sympathetic backstory or a defendant’s unpleasant personality may tempt you but if neither ties to a part of the rule, it does not belong at the center of your analysis.
There are relevant and irrelevant facts. Relevant facts relate to the legal issue in some way. Irrelevant facts have no bearing on the issue no matter how interesting they may be. Relevant facts are a broader category than legally significant facts. Every legally significant fact is relevant but not every relevant fact is legally significant. Some relevant facts support your analysis without deciding it. Irrelevant facts by contrast, add nothing to the analysis.
There are legally significant facts. These facts are the ones necessary for application, analysis, and maybe even understanding. They connect directly to the parts of the rule. If you change a legally significant fact, the outcome could change. A useful test of whether a fact is legally significant is to ask if this fact were different, would the rule be different? If the answer is yes, you are likely looking at a legally significant fact.
Inevitably, other types of facts exist but those discussed here give you a solid foundation. At a minimum, you need to identify the legally significant facts to handle most law school tasks, including case briefs, class discussion, legal writing assignments, and exams. When you have a task, try to sort facts as you go. Think of your process as a funnel. Start with all the facts. Set aside the irrelevant ones. From the relevant facts that remain, identify the legally significant ones. When you can reliably find legally significant facts, your analysis becomes sharper, more focused, and more persuasive.
Learning is a process. If you are a novice, you are on your way. If you are a veteran, there is always room to grow. Each task is a new opportunity to sharpen your eyes for the facts that matter.
(Goldie Pritchard)
