Application 1. Conclusion rule, tells what the paragraph is about and what rule is being applied 2.

Case comparison, support for the conlclusion Like the topic of the article in Messenger Do not restate like Messenger, the court Just use key facts, do not include unnecessary details for each argument

Restraint and Probable Cause: If there is no restraint, dont say probable cause does not matter Could be wrong, and you want to educate the reader, so they may weigh the principles.

Restraint: Not case law facts for all types of restraint, if you dont have facts that show apparent physical barriers, use the restatement and the legal standard language, stick to the standards, and dont use facts from cases to summarize Cite the Restatement, make it clear the court did as well, list the elements give the cite, and then who quoted it (which court used it). Meerbry language, supreme court case, pay attention to differences. F.I. vs. Unlawful Restraint -pay attention to differences in language, and see if it is a new rule or just the same thing phrased with synonyms

Formalness/Style/Structure: See online sample; rule/ruleproof. Less formal closing, but adhere to the same strucutres using professionalism, and you have smooth entry and exit, thereby getting rid of the issue, brief answer, and facts sections in the process. Stick to CRAC or a variation in discussion.