Same Cycle, Different Parameters

Chapter 14's takeaway fits in one sentence: what changes from one practice context to the next is not the cycle but the parameters the cycle runs with. Three parameters shift — the default question type, the first source, and most importantly the closure criterion — and the Research Log quietly changes jobs alongside them.

How to use this: study the three context cards, note the closure box (practical closure is normal in practice, not failure), then take the three checks.

Three contexts, one cycle

The cycle never changes. Three parameters do — the default question type, the first source, and the closure criterion — and the Research Log changes function with them.

Litigation

Default question type: Application questions — how do these facts compare to the controlling cases?
First source: Case law.
Closure criterion: Controlling authority for each issue; adverse authority identified and addressed.
The Research Log becomes: The documentation of the authority behind each argument.

Transactional

Default question type: Focusing questions about requirements and risks — what does this deal type require?
First source: Statutes and standardized forms.
Closure criterion: All applicable requirements and risks identified.
The Research Log becomes: The tracker of requirements and risk factors.

Regulatory compliance

Default question type: All four types — regulatory work spans the full set.
First source: The CFR and agency guidance.
Closure criterion: All obligations mapped.
The Research Log becomes: The map of compliance obligations.

Closure, revisited

The book’s two closure types run through every context. Analytical closure: every question answered or identified as genuinely open, the rule and its application covered. Practical closure: an external limit — a deadline, a budget, a client instruction — forces a stop, and you note what remains.

The practice reality: practice-specific research reaches practical closure far more often than academic or appellate work does. That is not failure — it is professional judgment, done honestly: the stopping point and the open questions get written down.

The meta-question that makes the method portable

A lawyer who has internalized the cycle can walk into an unfamiliar practice area and ask one question before the first search: “In this context, what is my default question type, where do I start, and what will tell me I’m done?” — and then run the same steps they have always run.

Three quick checks

0 of 3 answered