LOGIC FOR LEGAL REASONING

Rosel Joy Provido & Anniway Barcelona

Logic for Legal Reasoning John is 6 feet tall; Susan is taller

Logic and the law are intertwined than John; Susan must be taller
Law schools dont always teach than 6 feet
logical reasoning or argument
Most writting and speaking in the Deduction and Legal Reasoning
legal profession is based upon Syllogistic reasoning is the
logical arguments deductive reasoning that is also
You cannot read case like a lawyer used in judicial opinions, briefs and
until you understand the basics of memos
logical thinking Instead of a result being
COMPELLED by two FACTS it is
Logical Reasoning for Lawyers instead INFERRED from two
A basic command of logical PREMISES
reasoning is needed to follow most Major premise + minor premise =
legal arguments conclusion
Critical to success in the law school What is true of the universe is true
classroom of the particular
Central to effective engagement in Example
Socratic dialogue All people sleep (general) so
Not required to know the ins and students must sleep (particular)
outs of all logical reasoning just the Major premise (general): All people
basics sleep
Minor premise (particular):
Three Forms of Logical Reasoning Students are people
Every Reader of the Law Should Know Conclusion: Students sleep
Deductive reasoning
Proving a conclusion by Syllogism lies at the heart of legal
means of two other writing
propositions Griswold v. Connecticut
By far the most frequently A law is unconstitutional if it
used form of reasoning impacts the zone of privacy
conclusions under the law created by Bill of Rights.
Inductive generalization The law banning contraceptives
Arriving at sweeping impacts the zone of privacy
generalizations based upon created by the Bill of Rights.
a smaller, more discrete Therefore the law banning
event contraceptives is unconstitutional
Analogy
The comparison of two Learn to Think in Syllogisms
different things in order to Daily study is required to be a good
draw a conclusions about student
both (EXTREMELY I study daily
IMPORTANT IN LAW I am a good student
SCHOOL!) If you are not making syllogistic
arguments in your case briefs,
Deductive Reasoning legal writing, exams etc you will
One of two main forms of logical never succeed in law school.
reasoning
Important to the legal system and How do you develop the skill of
reasoning since this form of thinking/reasoning in syllogisms?
reasoning provides a grounded Construct a general rule as a major
foundation for conclusions premise
Deduction in reasoning in which a Widely known legal rule
conclusion is compelled by facts Applicable and relevant to
If A and B are true so must C your facts

1
 LOGIC FOR LEGAL REASONING
Rosel Joy Provido & Anniway Barcelona

Construct a minor premise for your Major Premise: The right of

facts privacy is guaranteed by the
Draw a conclusion based upon how Fourteenth or Ninth Amendment.
that general rule applies to the Minor Premise: A womans
minor premise about facts decision to terminate her
Example pregnancy is protected by the right
Major premise: The First of privacy.
Amendment protects certain kinds Conclusion:Therefore, a womans
of expression from being banned decision whether to terminate her
Nude dancing is a form of pregnancy is protected by the
expression protected by the first Fourteenth or Ninth Amendment.
amendment
The government cannot ban people Sometimes judges leave things out
from dancing without clothing that you should know
No matter how much rearranging
Think of a Generic Syllogism for Each of language you do you may be
Area of Law stuck!
Constitutional (rights of individuals) Efficiency means stuff gets left out
[Doing something] is especially when so widely known
protected by [constituional that both parties would accept that
basis] fact
[Plaintiff] was [Doing Be on the lookout for this kind of
something] scenario
[Plaintiff] is protected by
[constitutional basis] Pollysyllogisms
Can you think of one for Multiple syllogisms must be
criminal law? Contracts? constructed in order to establish a
Torts? conclusion
Most judicial opinions are written
Not always easy to find in judicial this way
opinions Rule based syllogisms get stacked
Excess language may obscure the upon one another in order to create
logical reasoning holdings
Doesnt mean its bad writing Hosanna-Tabor case
The law, after all, is complex!
Once you find it, however, you can Warning!
argue its validity or applicability-- Watch out for flawed syllogisms
so you have to find it! Sometimes the major premise is
Example not major enough
This right of privacy, whether it be If not encompassing it leaves room
founded in the Fourteenth for an opening in order to undercut
Amendments concept of personal the argument
liberty and restrictions upon state Look for qualifying language like
action, as we feel it is, or, as the some, sometimes, many, once,
District Court determined, in the occasionally, oftentimes etc.
Ninth Amendment reservation of
rights to the people, is broad Example
enough to encompass a woman Major Premise: Some forms of
decision whether or not to expression are protected by the
terminate her pregnancy. first amendment
Minor Premise: Nude dancing is a
The syllogism? form of expression
Major Premise? Conclusion: Nude dancing is
Minor Premise? protected by the first amendment
Conclusion?

2
 LOGIC FOR LEGAL REASONING
Rosel Joy Provido & Anniway Barcelona

Inductive Reasoning Mastering the use of analogy is one

Big, general principles are divined of the most crucial aspects of
from individual smaller events thinking/reading like a lawyer (as
Opposite of deductive well as law school and legal
Instead of general to specific practice)
induction is taking specific to Structure of Analogy
general A has characteristic C
The world is predictable enough to B has characteristic C
arrive at conclusions based upon A also has characteristic D
specific incidents that frequently Because A and B share C they must
occur share D as well
Not guaranteed
Useful to legal reasoning
Example Current cases get compared to new
Jane studies every day and is a ones
good student. Established precedent gets applied
Tom studies every day and is a to new factual scenarios
good student. Critical to judicial opinions
Angela studies every day and is a
good student. How does it work?
Good students study every day. Establish similarity between two
cases
When is inductive reasoning used? Announce the rule of law
When there is insufficient embedded in the first case
precedent Apply the rule of law to the second
No clear statute case
Basically, no major premise! Process of reasoning from
Easiest to understand but hardest particular to particular
to use The reasoning process becomes
Law students oftentimes default to more about establishing or
it when in classroom dialog debunking the similarities between
One example of the opposite of the the two cases
particular statements (e.g. Randy is
a good student but he never Example
studies) is all that is needed to You are issued a citation for driving
undermine them a scooter without a helmet
Case 1 prohibits riding a
Analogy motorcycle without a helmet
Plays a critical role in oral Case 2 allows riding a bike without
argument before appellate panels a helmet
and most law school classrooms Is a scooter a really fast bike or a
Used to test the validity of an slow motorcycle?
argument