Buffalo State University IRAC Analysis for Each Scenario Paper

this is the book

https://resources.saylor.org/wwwresources/archived/site/textbooks/Business%20Law%20and%20the%20Legal%20Environment.pdf

Perform an IRAC analysis for each scenario.

For many years, the Supreme Court believed that “commercial speech” was entitled to less protection than other forms of speech. One defining element of commercial speech is that its dominant theme is to propose a commercial transaction. This kind of speech is protected by the First Amendment, but the government is permitted to regulate it more closely than other forms of speech. However, the government must make reasonable distinctions, must narrowly tailor the rules restricting commercial speech, and must show that government has a legitimate goal that the law furthers.Edward Salib owned a Winchell’s Donut House in Mesa, Arizona. To attract customers, he displayed large signs in store windows. The city ordered him to remove the signs because they violated the city’s sign code, which prohibited covering more than 30 percent of a store’s windows with signs. The issue is whether the store’s commercial speech has been abridged/censored by the local government.Jennifer is a freshman at her local public high school. Her sister, Jackie, attends a nearby private high school. Neither school allows them to join its respective wrestling team; only boys can wrestle at either school. The issue is whether Jennifer and/or Jackie have a 14th Amendment equal protection clause claim for the schools’ actions.The employees of the U.S. Treasury Department that work the border crossing between the United States and Mexico learned that they would be subject to routine drug testing. The customs bureau, which is a division of the treasury department, announces this policy along with its reasoning: since customs agents must routinely search for drugs coming into the United States, it makes sense that border guards must themselves be completely drug-free. Many border guards do not use drugs, have no intention of using drugs, and object to the invasion of their privacy. The issue is whether the federal government has violated any Constitutional rights that belong to the border guards. Identify what right(s) was (were) affected.Happy Time Chevrolet employs Jim Bydalek as a salesman. Bydalek takes part in a Gay Pride March in Los Angeles, is interviewed by a local news camera crew, and reports that he is gay and proud of it. His employer is not, and he is fired. The issue is whether the employer has violated the employee’s First Amendment rights.5. You begin work at the Happy-Go-Lucky Corporation on Halloween. On your second day at work, you wear a political button on your coat, supporting your choice for U.S. senator in the upcoming election. Your boss, who is of a different political persuasion, looks at the button and says, “Take that stupid button off or you’re fired.” The issue is whether the boss has violated the employee’s First Amendment rights.

the irac method is the file.

IRAC Analysis of Goldilocks vis a vis Burglary
Prosecution Argument: The issue is whether Goldilocks is guilty of the Old English common law
crime of burglary. The rule of law for burglary has four requisite elements: 1) breaking, 2) entering, 3) a
dwelling place, and 4) at night.
Goldilocks was found by the Bear Family in the bedroom of the house. Thus, Goldilocks was found
inside the house. That means that Goldilocks must have broken and entered. She must have broken the
seal of the door to its door jamb and she must have crossed the threshold in order to enter. In the
alternative, she must have broken the seal of the window in its frame and crossed the barrier of the
window in order to enter the house. Whether the door was unlocked or the window was open is
irrelevant as all that is required for burglary is the breaking and entering of the dwelling. Being found
inside demonstrates that Goldilocks did indeed break and enter because she did not have permission
from Papa Bear nor from Mama Bear to be inside their house.
The third element of burglary is a dwelling place. The house of the Bear family is a dwelling place. It
was where the Bears lived and where they cooked their meals and relaxed and slept.
The fourth element of burglary is “at night.” As Goldilocks wandered in the forest lost for “hours and
hours” prior to arriving at the Bears’ house, it must have been late in the day. As the time of year was in
January, it is known that the sun sets between 4:30-6 pm daily and so this shows that the burglary
occurred at night. Additionally, bears are nocturnal creatures, sleeping during the day and going out
during the night. Finally, the fact that Goldilocks wandered for hours and then fell fast asleep once she
was in Baby Bear’s bed also indicate that it was at night. She was old enough to be lost in the forest and
so she was too old to need to nap during daylight hours.
Therefore, Goldilocks should be found guilty of burglary as she broke and entered into the Bear’s
dwelling place at night.
Defense Argument: The issue is whether Goldilocks is innocent of the Old English common law crime
of burglary. The rule of law for burglary has four requisite elements: 1) breaking, 2) entering, 3) a
dwelling place, and 4) at night.
Although Goldilocks is alleged to have been found inside the bear’s home, the claim of burglary is
unreasonable. Firstly, bears do not have opposable thumbs and therefore a bear could not turn a knob in
order to enter the dwelling place. Thus, breaking could not have occurred as the bears could not
themselves break the seal of the door or window. Entry requires the defendant to step over a threshold or
IRAC Analysis of Goldilocks vis a vis Burglary
otherwise cross a demarcation into the dwelling. As bears live in the forest in caves, there is no clear
demarcation between the inside and the outside of the cave. In other words, there is no threshold for the
defendant to cross in order for her to have “entered” according to the requisite elements for burglary.
Additionally, a dwelling place, in the law, indicates a human abode – the Bear family clearly is not
human and therefore it is unreasonable to call their cave a dwelling place. Finally, no evidence has been
presented to indicate whether the bear family is nocturnal or not. Any youngster who has been through
the trauma of being lost in a forest and finally reaching a place of perceived safety and being able to eat
will need to rest and sleep following the trauma. Whether Goldilocks was asleep on Baby Bear’s pallet
does not necessarily prove that it was at night as is required for burglary.
Finally, as Goldilocks is clearly below the age of majority (18), her entry into the bear’s cave could be
viewed as an act of necessity and therefore it was in the public interest for her to seek shelter at the
bears’ house. Additionally, as Goldilocks is not yet a teenager, she does not have the “mens rea” (mental
capacity/intent) necessary to be convicted of burglary.
Therefore, Goldilocks should be found innocent of burglary as she could not break or enter into a cave
which is not a dwelling place for humans and there is no indication that it was night and not still
daylight.