CRuPAC is an acronym that generally stands for: Conclusion, Rule, Proof, Application and Conclusion. It functions as a system for organizing a closed legal brief. The CRuPAC format is a "closed" format that is frequently used in responsive legal pleadings, where the issue has already been properly framed and identified by the movant (often through use of the related IRAC

IRAC

IRAC is an acronym that generally stands for: Issue, Relevant law, Application to facts, and Conclusion. It functions as a methodology for legal analysis. The IRAC format is mostly used in hypothetical questions in law school and bar exams.-Issue:The IRAC starts with a statement of the Issue or...

 methodology). Some authors have suggested dropping the "P" section of CRuPAC, which results in only four sections: Conclusion, Rule, Application and Conclusion

Conclusion

The CRuPAC starts by stating the conclusion that the author wishes the reader (or judge) to reach.

Rules

The rules section of a CRuPAC follows the conclusion. The rule section of a CRuPAC is the statement of the rules that govern the particular question. Rules may include statutes, constitutions, the Rules of Civil Procedure

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern civil procedure in United States district courts. The FRCP are promulgated by the United States Supreme Court pursuant to the Rules Enabling Act, and then the United States Congress has 7 months to veto the rules promulgated or they become part of the...

, the Rules of Criminal Procedure

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure are the procedural rules that govern how federal criminal prosecutions are conducted in United States district courts, the general trial courts of the U.S. government. As such, they are the companion to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure...

, the Rules of Evidence

Federal Rules of Evidence

The is a code of evidence law governing the admission of facts by which parties in the United States federal court system may prove their cases, both civil and criminal. The Rules were enacted in 1975, with subsequent amendments....

, etc. The pertinent rule may also be included in Restatements of the Law, or the common law

Common law

Common law is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals rather than through legislative statutes or executive branch action...

 as derived from court case precedent

Precedent

In common law legal systems, a precedent or authority is a principle or rule established in a legal case that a court or other judicial body may apply when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts...

. Which rules are applicable depends entirely on the question being addressed.

Proof

The "P" in CRuPAC stands for "proof," although many attorneys sometimes refer to this as the "precedent

Precedent

In common law legal systems, a precedent or authority is a principle or rule established in a legal case that a court or other judicial body may apply when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts...

" section. In the proof section, the author uses case law to prove how the rule operates and to give examples of how the rule is used.

Application

The application section of a CRuPAC applies the rules developed in the rules section to the specific facts of the issue at hand. It is generally improper to introduce new rules in the Application section. If the rules developed in the rules section include common law

Common law

Common law is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals rather than through legislative statutes or executive branch action...

 decisions, then the most efficient way of applying those rules to the facts is by the method compare and contrast, in which the facts of the cases cited as precedent

Precedent

In common law legal systems, a precedent or authority is a principle or rule established in a legal case that a court or other judicial body may apply when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts...

are compared to the facts in the current litigation.

Conclusion

The (second) conclusion section of a CRuPAC restates the introductory conclusion. It is important that the (second) conclusion not merely copy the introduction verbatim; but rather, that the second conclusion restate the introduction in a compelling manner. It is never proper to introduce new argument or rules in the conclusion. By using two conclusion sections, the CRUPAC applies the maxim: "Tell 'em what you're gonna tell 'em, tell 'em, then tell 'em what you told 'em."