malfunction to computers
Robert Morris, a PhD student in computer science at Cornell University, designed a computer program known as a “worm” and released it onto the Internet. The worm spread and multiplied and eventually caused computers at various educational and military institutions to crash. Morris argued that he released the worm to demonstrate to fellow graduate students the lack of security protecting computer networks. With what crime was he most likely charged? Was this prosecution successful? [United States v. Robert Tappen Morris, 928 F.2d 504 (1991).]
Two campus security officers questioned Michael Jensen when they saw him walking across campus with a dormitory lounge chair propped on his head at 3:13 a.m. Jensen refused to identify himself to the officers but claimed he was simply playing a prank by carrying the chair from one residence hall to another residence hall across campus. The officers repeatedly asked him for identification, which he repeatedly refused to provide. When the officers told him that they would remove his identification from his jeans pocket, he began to comply. When the officers told Jensen that he was under arrest, Jensen ran away. Later, he was caught and indicted by a grand jury for petit larceny. Jensen claimed that there was no evidence that he did not intend to return the chair, so the indictment was flawed. Why did the court of appeals affirm the indictment? [People of New York v. Jensen, 86 N.Y.2d 248 (1995); 1995 N.Y. LEXIS 2230.]
3. Throughout the 1990s, Morteza Eghbal and Marilyn Trujillo purchased Housing and Urban Development (HUD) foreclosed homes and resold them for profit to buyers with mortgage secured loans insured by HUD. Eghbal and Trujillo sold to buyers who lacked sufficient assets to cover the down payment on the properties, and they provided the down payment for the buys. HUD would not insure a loan for a home for which the down payment was payed by the seller. To that end, HUD required that a seller of a home sign a document called “Addendum to the HUD-1 Settlement Statement”. By signing the addendum, the seller certified that he had not, and would not, pay the buyer for any part of the down payment and that he did not have knowledge of any loans made to the buyer for purposes of financing the transaction other than those describe in the sales contract. HUD would not insure a loan without a validity signed addendum. For each instance in which they provided the down payment, Eghbal and Trujillo fraudulently signed the addendum, falsely stating that they provided no funds toward the down payment. HUD ultimately paid out about $2.8 million for the balances owing on 27 defaulted mortgages for properties Eghbal and Trujillo sold. The government sued Eghbal and Trujillo under the False Claims Act (FCA). The government argued that without the false statements on the addendum, HUD would not have insured the mortgage loans. Eghbal and Trujillo contend that the government failed to show that their false statements set in motion a false claim. Eghbal and Trujillo sought out to fraudulently induce HUD to insure the mortgage, not to have the buyers default or cause the mortgage holders to make claims on HUD. Eghbal and Trujillo were not parties to the actual claims presented to HUD, made after the buyers defaulted, that resulted in monetary payments by the government. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the government, and Eghbal and Trujillo appealed. Did the addendums constitute a false claim helping to defraud the government? Why? [U.S. v. Eghbal, 548 F.3d 1281 (9th Cir. 2008).]
Bernadette Sablan was fired from her job at the Bank of Hawaii for circumventing security procedures when retrieving files. One night after drinking at a bar with a friend, she entered an unlocked door at the bank. She went to her old workstation and logged on to the mainframe by using an old password. She contends that she simply accessed several files and logged out. The government argued that she changed and deleted several files. Regardless, her actions damaged several bank files.
Introduction to IRAC
All homework case problems and essay answers on the examinations must be answered in IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) format. This is a specialized format that is used in the law to help us analyze legal questions and develop our critical legal thinking skills. It helps teach us how to look at a set of facts, determine the rule of law that applies, apply the law to that set of facts, and then develop a legally defensible conclusion.
Example:
Beulah walked up quietly behind Verna and hit her in the head with a textbook causing serious injury to Verna.
Verna will end up suing Beulah. The ISSUE is the fundamental/basic question that Verna will be asking the court to answer. It should be specific as to the cause of action upon which Verna is suing–in essence:
Issue: Whether Beulah is liable to Verna for battery.
The next step is the RULE. This is the rule of law that applies to the case. How can you tell whether Beulah is liable unless you know what the definition of battery is? The rule is the definition of the cause of action.
Rule: Battery-an unauthorized and harmful or offensive physical contact with another person.
The next step is the toughest–the APPLICATION. Students normally struggle with this section initially but eventually get the hang of it. It takes lots of practice by spending time on your homework answers and reviewing the model answers–practice, practice, practice. The application is where you take the elements of the rule (definition of the cause of action) and match it with the facts of the case. The best way to determine the elements is to look at the adjectives used in the definition. For example, the first thing that’s required for a battery is an unauthorized contact. The next thing that’s required is that the contact be harmful or offensive. The next requirement is that there be a physical contact. The last requirement is that the contact be with another person.
What facts indicate to you that this contact was unauthorized? The fact that Beulah walked up quietly behind Verna. What fact indicates that the contact was harmful (let’s go with harmful as opposed to offensive in this case)? The fact that Verna suffered serious injuries. What fact indicates that there was a physical contact? The fact that Beulah hit Verna. What fact indicates that Verna is a person? Well, the facts aren’t specific, but it’s a reasonable presumption.
Application: This contact was unauthorized because the facts state that Beulah walked up quietly behind Verna indicating that she did not want to be discovered. The contact was harmful because the facts state that Verna suffered serious injuries. The facts also state that Verna was hit by Beulah which means that there was physical contact. Finally, while the facts don’t state specifically that Verna is a person, it is a reasonable assumption given the circumstances.
The next section is the CONCLUSION which is the answer to the question asked in the issue–yes or no.
Conclusion: Yes. (It’s also okay to write a one sentence affirmation of your conclusion like “Yes, based on the facts presented, Beulah is liable for battery” if you choose to do so)
In IRAC you are not advocating one side or the other–you are to look at each scenario like a judge and analyze the facts leading you to develop a “ruling” so to speak.
Do not provide “cut and paste” analyses. These are analyses where the student simply gives back the facts given without any analysis. For example:
Issue: Whether Beulah is liable to Verna for battery.
Rule: Battery-an unauthorized and harmful or offensive physical contact with another person.
Application: Beulah walked up quietly behind Verna and hit her in the head with a textbook causing serious injury to Verna.
Conclusion: Yes.
This is not a good IRAC–and will result in very few points. It does not explain how you came to your conclusion. Basically, the student is taking the facts given and saying to the professor–“Here are the facts you gave me. I’m giving them back. I don’t know how to figure out this problem–you do it.” Don’t make your mother cry by getting a low score on your IRAC. Give me a good IRAC using proper form and analysis and get points for your efforts on an exam.
Also, if you are struggling to make the facts fit the rule, step by and ask yourself whether or not you are using the correct rule.
………………………….Answer preview………………………
Case 1
Issue: Robert Morris, a student in computer science developed software that caused malfunction to computers in the military and institution. Should the court charge the student for developing the software or for causing the other computers to malfunction………………………………………
APA
851 words
