Legal Reasoning

• Author: Kevin J. Fandl
• Profession: Director of the Global Legal Education Institute
• Pages: 93-98

Legal Reasoning

Chapter 5

93

Introduction

The common-law system is unique in many ways. One of the most

significant differences between common law and other systems of

law is the process of legal reasoning. Unlike in a civil-law system,

in which the legal professional investigates to determine what the

law “is,” common-law lawyers investigate to determine what the

law “should be.”

One of my favorite classes in college was a class called Sym-

bolic Logic. Understanding how to determine whether an argument

was sound based on the validity of the premises started me down

the road to become an analytical thinker. And though it did teach

me in some ways how to think like a lawyer—that is, through criti-

cal analysis—it did not teach me precisely the way that an Ameri-

can lawyer crafts an argument. Yet these foundations are essential

in understanding the logic behind U.S. legal reasoning.

Deductive analysis in its simplest form would go something

like this:

Oral contracts for real estate are not enforceable.

Kevin and Monica entered into an oral real estate contract.

Kevin and Monica’s real estate contract is not enforceable.

Or more simply put, If P, then Q. P; therefore, Q.