The Legal Research Memo: Format, Structure, and Examples

The Standard Memo Format

An objective research memo — the classic law firm and law school assignment — has six sections in a fixed order:

1. Heading (To / From / Date / Re)
2. Question Presented
3. Brief Answer
4. Statement of Facts
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion

The order embodies a principle: the reader gets the answer before the analysis. A supervising attorney may read only the question and brief answer; the discussion exists so they can verify the reasoning when they need to. The memo is the written output of step six of the legal research process, and everything about its form serves the busy reader.

Section by Section: QP, Brief Answer, Facts, Discussion

Question Presented. One sentence with three ingredients: the governing law, the precise question, and the determinative facts. The workhorse format is “Under [jurisdiction’s law], does/is [legal question] when [key facts]?” A question without the facts (“Is the store liable?”) is too abstract to answer; a good QP nearly answers itself.

Brief Answer. Start with a direct answer — and note that practicing lawyers hedge honestly: “Probably yes,” “Likely not” — followed by two to four sentences distilling the reasoning. No citations needed here; that is what the discussion is for.

Statement of Facts. A neutral narrative of the legally significant facts, in past tense, including the facts that hurt. This is the section that separates objective memos from advocacy: the reader must be able to trust that nothing was shaded. Include the facts the rules make relevant and note facts you do not yet know.

Discussion. The analysis, organized by issue, each in IRAC or CREAC form: conclusion or issue first, then the rule synthesized from the authorities with citations, explanation of how courts have applied it, application to your facts, and honest treatment of counterarguments. Rule statements come from cases and statutes you have verified — citator-checked, and cited in proper form (see how to cite a law case).

Conclusion. Short: the bottom line restated, plus open questions, missing facts, and recommended next steps.

A Full Example Memo, Annotated

Here is a compact worked example, condensed to show the moves:

Re: Whether Meadow Grocery is liable for Ms. Diaz’s slip-and-fall.

Question Presented: Under this state’s premises liability law, is a store liable to a customer who slipped on a grape that had been on the floor for approximately forty minutes, where no employee inspected the aisle during that period? (Law + question + determinative facts, one sentence.)

Brief Answer: Probably yes. A store owes customers reasonable care and is liable for hazards it had constructive notice of. Courts in this state have found constructive notice where a hazard persisted long enough that reasonable inspection would have found it; forty minutes without inspection likely qualifies, though liability may be reduced if Diaz was not watching where she walked. (Direct answer, hedged honestly, with the “why” compressed.)

Facts: [Neutral narrative: the fall, the grape, the timing evidence from the security footage, the store’s inspection log — including that Diaz was reading her phone.] (The unfavorable phone fact goes in. Objective means objective.)

Discussion: [Issue 1: duty and constructive notice — rule from the leading state cases with citations, explanation of the timing-based cases, application to the forty-minute gap. Issue 2: comparative negligence — rule, application to the phone fact, likely percentage-reduction range per the cases.] (One issue per IRAC block; counterarguments addressed inside each.)

Conclusion: [Bottom line; recommends obtaining the full inspection log and any maintenance policy before advising further.]

Free Memo Template

Copy and fill in — no download required:

MEMORANDUM

TO:       [Assigning attorney / instructor]
FROM:     [Your name]
DATE:     [Date]
RE:       [Client/matter — one-line issue description]

QUESTION PRESENTED
Under [governing law], [legal question] when [key facts]?

BRIEF ANSWER
[Probably yes / Probably not]. [2–4 sentences of core reasoning.]

STATEMENT OF FACTS
[Neutral narrative of legally significant facts, favorable and not.]

DISCUSSION
I. [First issue]
   [Rule with citations → how courts apply it → application to
    these facts → counterarguments.]
II. [Second issue]
   [Same structure.]

CONCLUSION
[Bottom line. Open questions. Facts still needed.]

Objective vs Persuasive Writing

The memo is objective: its job is to predict what a court would do, which requires giving the bad news and the weak points their full weight. A brief filed with a court is persuasive: same research, same authorities, but organized to advance one side within the bounds of candor. Confusing the two ruins both. A memo written persuasively misleads the lawyer relying on it; the classic tell is a facts section that omits everything unfavorable. Learn the objective form first — persuasive writing is covered in legal research and writing — because an advocate who cannot first assess a case honestly has nothing reliable to advocate from.

Common Memo Mistakes

• A question presented without facts — if the QP could begin any memo in the practice area, it is too abstract.
• Burying the answer — the brief answer opens with “probably yes/no,” not with background.
• Case-by-case book reports in the discussion instead of a synthesized rule: the reader needs the rule the cases add up to, then application.
• Ignoring counterarguments — an objective memo that reads like a brief has failed at its one job.
• Unverified authority — every cited case citator-checked, every statute checked for amendment; no exceptions.
• Outline-shaped padding — headings and length substituting for analysis. A tight three-page memo beats a loose eight-page one everywhere memos are read.