The Application begins with an introduction sentence that effectively sets up the point of the analysis.
The Application follows the introduction with an Explanatory sentence that effectively sets up the forthcoming fact-to-fact comparison between the instant case and precedent case(s) by stating how the relevant language from the rule applies similarly or distinctively in both cases.
The Application includes fact-to-fact comparisons that show how the key, determinative facts from the instant case and precedent case(s) are the same or importantly different.
The Application includes fact-to-fact comparisons that repeat the same key language from the rule when discussing both the instant case and precedent case(s) throughout the comparison.
The Application includes as many fact-to-fact comparisons as there are similarities and/or differences between the determinative facts of the instant case and those of the precedent cases.
The Application acknowledges the holding of the precedent case in the fact-to-fact comparison to assure the instant court that its decision will be consistent with the law since the facts are analogous or importantly distinctive to those of the precedent cases.
If applicable: the Application includes any relevant counter-argument or counter prediction.
The Application concludes with a thus/therefore statement that acknowledges the precedent case(s) and explains the predictive holding in a because statement that briefly references the analogous and/or distinctive facts.
The Application uses paragraphs to organize the analysis according to the elements, factors, and/or illustrated cases to be analyzed.
The Application follows proper Bluebook citation (long and short form) when citing the sentence that mentions the determinative fact from the illustrated case and, if applicable, when citing to the case file for the determinative fact from the instant case.