Write On!

• Publication year: 2024
• Citation: Vol. 47 No. 4

Write On!Vol. 47 No. 4 Pg. 46Wyoming Bar JournalAugust 2024

Michael R. Smith

The Three Categories of Comparison in Case-Comparison Analysis

Michael R. Smith is a Professor of Law at the University of Wyoming College of Law and the Director of the Center for the Study of Written Advocacy.

Case-comparison analysis is one of the many forms of legal analysis lawyers must communicate in legal writing. In case-comparison analysis, the writer explains how the facts of the writer's present case are similar to or different from the facts of a precedent case and the legal significance of those comparisons in terms of the reasoning of the court in the precedent case.

There are three categories of comparison in case-comparison analysis:

(1) Similarity Comparisons. Similarity comparisons involve a writer explaining how the facts of the present case are similar to the facts of a precedent case and how these similarities support the same conclusion as was reached in the precedent case.

(2) Distinguishing Comparisons. With distinguishing comparisons, a writer explains how the facts of the present case are different from the facts of a precedent case and how those differences justify a different conclusion from that of the precedent case.

(3) "Even Stronger" Comparisons. "Even stronger" comparisons involve a writer explaining how the facts of the present case are different from the facts of a precedent case and how those differences make the facts of the present case even more compelling for the same conclusion as the precedent case.

Amazingly, all three categories of comparisons are demonstrated in the following short excerpt from the Wyoming Supreme Court case of Flood v. State^[1] In Flood, a Highway Patrol Trooper named Chatfield pulled over a car for speeding. The driver of the car was Aaron Flood, and the car was owned by one of the passengers...