| After the Answer stage of the lawsuit, each party | | | | fraud in Illinois are 1) Lender made a statement of |
| will have an opportunity to file motions and | | | | material fact, 2) the lender knew or believed to be |
| discovery. Generally, the motion is fairly brief, but | | | | false, 3) the borrower had a right to rely on the |
| contains a Memorandum in Support of the Motion, or, | | | | statement, 4) the borrower did rely on the |
| when defending against a motion, a Memorandum in | | | | statement, 5) the lender intended to induce |
| Opposition. These memoranda outline the legal | | | | defendants to rely on the statement, and 6) the |
| argument supporting or opposing the motion (a | | | | borrower was damaged in reliance. Siegel v. Levy |
| motion is a request for the court to do something). | | | | Organization Development Co., 153 Ill. 2d 534, 542-43, |
| To be effective, the memoranda must be based on | | | | 180 Ill. Dec. 300, 607 N.E.2d 194 (1992). |
| solid legal principles and be supported by the facts. | | | | [RULE ELEMENT 1] The first element of fraud |
| Using the “IRAC” form in writing the | | | | requires the lender made a statement of material |
| memoranda enables the court to follow a legal | | | | fact. [APPLICATION OF RULE ELEMENT 1] Here, |
| argument in a manner it is used to seeing. | | | | the lender told Bob the loan would be a thirty year |
| Law students are taught to write memoranda in the | | | | fixed rate. (Bob Affidavit, pg. 1) [CONCLUSION OF |
| IRAC form from the very first class. IRAC stands | | | | ELEMENT 1] Thus, the lender made a statement of |
| for Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion. The | | | | material fact. |
| Issue is a brief statement of the dispute. The Rule | | | | [RULE ELEMENT 2] The second element of fraud |
| is the section that contains any elements or | | | | requires the lender knew or believed the statement |
| statutory requirements that must be proven, and | | | | to be false. [APPLICATION OF ELEMENT 2] Here, |
| should be followed by the statute in question or a | | | | the paperwork the lender presented to Bob for |
| case from that court’s jurisdiction that explains | | | | signing indicated the loan was a two year ARM. As |
| the elements of rule. The Application is how the | | | | evidenced by the lender’s broker, Patty Jones, |
| facts support or oppose the particular Rule | | | | the lender never intended to provide Bob a thirty |
| elements. This is where the persuasive selling of the | | | | year fixed loan. (Patty Jones Affidavit, pg 1.) |
| argument comes into play. The application part of | | | | [CONCLUSION OF ELEMENT 2] Thus, the lender |
| “IRAC” should start with the word | | | | made a statement it knew to be false. |
| “Here,” to tell the court the writer is moving | | | | ….after each element is discussed in its own |
| into the application stage. The Conclusion is a brief | | | | paragraph, an overall conclusion is stated at the |
| sentence summing up what was said. Here is an | | | | end… |
| example of a brief IRAC argument: | | | | [CONCLUSION] In conclusion, Bob is entitled to |
| [ISSUE] The issue is whether Bob recover damages | | | | recover damages from the lender for common law |
| from lender for fraud. [RULE] The elements of | | | | fraud. |