Glossary

2.5 Extracting legal rules

10 min read•august 21, 2024

Legal rules are the backbone of legal analysis and decision-making. Understanding their components, sources, and how to extract them from cases is crucial for effective legal reasoning and argumentation in Legal Method and Writing.

Mastering techniques like and helps lawyers organize thoughts and present arguments clearly. Proper rule identification, synthesis, and application enable attorneys to construct strong legal arguments and predict case outcomes accurately.

  • Legal rules form the foundation of legal analysis and decision-making in Legal Method and Writing
  • Understanding the components of legal rules enables lawyers to interpret and apply them effectively
  • Proper identification of rule components leads to more accurate legal reasoning and argumentation

Elements vs factors

Top images from around the web for Elements vs factors

  • Informal logic - Wikipedia View original

    Is this image relevant?

  • The Five Parts of an Argument - EnglishComposition.Org View original

    Is this image relevant?

  • Informal logic - Wikipedia View original

    Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Elements vs factors

  • Informal logic - Wikipedia View original

    Is this image relevant?

  • The Five Parts of an Argument - EnglishComposition.Org View original

    Is this image relevant?

  • Informal logic - Wikipedia View original

    Is this image relevant?

1 of 3
  • constitute mandatory components of a legal rule that must all be present
  • weigh for or against a legal conclusion without being individually determinative
  • Elements typically use conjunctive language (and, all of the following)
  • Factors often employ balancing tests or totality of circumstances approaches
  • Identifying elements vs factors impacts how attorneys structure legal arguments

Mandatory vs discretionary rules

  • use language like "shall," "must," or "will" to indicate required actions
  • employ terms such as "may," "can," or "should" to allow flexibility
  • Mandatory rules leave little room for interpretation or deviation
  • Discretionary rules grant judges or decision-makers more latitude in application
  • Understanding the nature of a rule affects how it is argued and applied in legal practice

Exceptions and limitations

  • carve out specific situations where a general rule does not apply
  • restrict the scope or applicability of a legal rule
  • Exceptions often begin with phrases like "unless," "except," or "does not apply to"
  • Limitations may include temporal restrictions, jurisdictional boundaries, or subject matter constraints
  • Recognizing exceptions and limitations prevents overly broad application of legal rules
  • Legal rules originate from various authoritative sources in the legal system
  • Understanding the hierarchy and interplay of these sources is crucial for effective legal research and analysis
  • Proper identification of rule sources enhances the credibility and persuasiveness of legal arguments

Statutes and regulations

  • enacted by legislative bodies serve as primary sources of law
  • issued by administrative agencies provide detailed implementation of statutory mandates
  • techniques apply to discern the meaning and intent of legislative language
  • Regulations must stay within the scope of authority granted by the enabling statute
  • Hierarchy of authority places federal statutes and regulations above state counterparts

Case law precedents

  • Judicial decisions create binding or persuasive precedents depending on jurisdiction and court level
  • doctrine requires courts to follow previous decisions on similar legal issues
  • represents the binding part of a court's decision
  • involves identifying relevant factual or legal differences
  • requires compelling reasons and typically occurs at higher court levels

Secondary sources

  • , law review articles, and restatements provide explanations and analysis of legal rules
  • offer persuasive authority rather than binding precedent
  • Judges and attorneys use secondary sources to understand complex legal issues and identify primary sources
  • synthesize general principles from case law across jurisdictions
  • Law review articles often propose new legal theories or critique existing rules

Identifying rule statements

  • Accurate identification of rule statements is essential for effective legal analysis and writing
  • Rule statements form the basis for applying law to facts in legal reasoning
  • Proper rule identification enables lawyers to construct strong legal arguments and predict case outcomes

Express vs implied rules

  • are explicitly stated in statutes, regulations, or judicial opinions
  • are inferred from the reasoning or outcome of a case
  • Express rules provide clear guidance and are easier to identify and apply
  • Implied rules require careful analysis of the court's reasoning and factual context
  • Identifying implied rules often involves synthesizing multiple cases or sources

Holding vs dicta

  • represents the court's decision on the specific legal issue before it
  • consists of additional comments or observations not essential to the decision
  • Holdings carry precedential weight and bind lower courts
  • Dicta may be persuasive but does not create binding precedent
  • Distinguishing between holding and dicta requires careful analysis of the court's reasoning and the facts of the case

Majority vs dissenting opinions

  • represent the controlling law and create binding precedent
  • express disagreement with the majority's reasoning or conclusion
  • agree with the result but offer different reasoning
  • Dissenting opinions may influence future cases or signal potential shifts in legal doctrine
  • Analyzing dissenting opinions helps lawyers understand weaknesses in the majority's reasoning and potential future legal developments

Rule synthesis

  • combines rules from multiple sources to create a comprehensive legal framework
  • Effective rule synthesis enhances legal analysis and argumentation in Legal Method and Writing
  • Synthesized rules provide a more complete understanding of complex legal issues

Reconciling conflicting rules

  • Identify apparent conflicts between rules from different sources or jurisdictions
  • Apply principles of statutory interpretation to resolve conflicts between statutes
  • Use the hierarchy of authority to determine which rule takes precedence
  • Consider the specificity of rules, with more specific rules often prevailing over general ones
  • Examine the underlying policy goals to harmonize seemingly

Filling gaps in rules

  • Identify areas where existing rules do not provide clear guidance
  • Use to extend principles from similar legal situations
  • Consider policy implications and to infer how gaps should be filled
  • Examine trends in related areas of law to predict how courts might address the gap
  • Propose new rules or modifications to existing rules to address unresolved issues

Combining rules from multiple sources

  • Identify relevant rules from statutes, case law, and regulations
  • Organize rules by topic or legal issue to create a coherent framework
  • Use conjunctive or disjunctive language to connect related rules
  • Incorporate exceptions and limitations from various sources into the synthesized rule
  • Ensure the synthesized rule accurately reflects the current state of the law across all relevant sources

Rule formulation techniques

  • Rule formulation techniques provide structured approaches to legal analysis and writing
  • These methods help lawyers organize their thoughts and present arguments effectively
  • Mastering rule formulation techniques is crucial for success in Legal Method and Writing courses

IRAC method

  • Issue: Identify the legal question or problem to be addressed
  • Rule: State the relevant legal rule or principle
  • Application: Apply the rule to the specific facts of the case
  • Conclusion: Reach a logical conclusion based on the application of the rule to the facts
  • IRAC provides a clear and concise structure for legal analysis and writing

CREAC method

  • Conclusion: State the ultimate answer to the legal question
  • Rule: Articulate the relevant legal rule or principle
  • Explanation: Elaborate on the rule's meaning and significance
  • Application: Apply the rule to the specific facts of the case
  • Conclusion: Restate the conclusion, tying it back to the initial statement
  • CREAC offers a more detailed approach, emphasizing rule explanation

Rule-based reasoning

  • Identify the governing legal rule for the issue at hand
  • Break down the rule into its constituent elements or factors
  • Analyze each element or factor in light of the case facts
  • Determine whether all elements are satisfied or how factors balance
  • Reach a conclusion based on the systematic application of the rule
  • Rule-based reasoning ensures thorough and logical legal analysis

Extracting rules from cases

  • Extracting rules from cases is a fundamental skill in legal research and analysis
  • This process involves careful reading and interpretation of judicial opinions
  • Effective rule extraction enables lawyers to apply precedent accurately in new situations

Key facts vs irrelevant details

  • Identify facts that were crucial to the court's decision-making process
  • Distinguish between material facts that influenced the outcome and background information
  • Focus on facts that relate directly to the legal issue being addressed
  • Recognize patterns of facts that courts consistently find significant in similar cases
  • Avoid overemphasis on unique or unusual facts that may limit the rule's applicability

Reasoning behind the decision

  • Analyze the court's logical progression from facts to legal principles to conclusion
  • Identify explicit statements of legal rules or principles relied upon by the court
  • Look for or broader legal theories informing the court's decision
  • Examine how the court distinguishes or reconciles the case with previous precedents
  • Pay attention to the court's discussion of hypothetical scenarios or future implications

Scope of rule application

  • Determine the breadth or narrowness of the rule established by the court
  • Consider any limitations or qualifications the court places on its holding
  • Examine how the rule might apply to slightly different factual scenarios
  • Assess whether the rule is jurisdiction-specific or has broader applicability
  • Identify any signals from the court about potential extensions or restrictions of the rule

Statutory interpretation

  • Statutory interpretation is the process of determining the meaning and application of legislation
  • This skill is crucial for accurately understanding and applying statutory rules
  • Various methods of interpretation help resolve ambiguities and conflicts in statutory language

Plain meaning rule

  • Begin interpretation by examining the ordinary, dictionary meaning of statutory terms
  • Assume that legislators intended words to have their common, everyday meanings
  • Consider the context in which words are used within the statute
  • Apply the plain meaning unless it leads to absurd or clearly unintended results
  • Recognize that technical or legal terms may have specialized meanings that differ from common usage

Legislative intent

  • Examine legislative history to understand the purpose behind the statute
  • Consider committee reports, floor debates, and statements by bill sponsors
  • Look for explicit statements of purpose or policy goals within the statute itself
  • Analyze the problem or issue the statute was intended to address
  • Balance the expressed intent with the actual text of the statute

Canons of construction

  • Apply established principles of interpretation used by courts
  • Noscitur a sociis: interpret words in light of surrounding words
  • Expressio unius est exclusio alterius: expression of one thing implies exclusion of others
  • In pari materia: interpret related statutes harmoniously
  • Rule against surplusage: assume every word in a statute has meaning and effect
  • Consider both textual canons (focusing on language) and substantive canons (based on legal principles)

Rule application

  • Rule application involves using extracted legal rules to analyze new factual situations
  • This process is central to legal reasoning and argumentation
  • Effective rule application demonstrates the ability to connect abstract legal principles to concrete facts

Analogical reasoning

  • Compare the facts of the current case to precedent cases
  • Identify similarities and differences between the cases
  • Argue that similar facts should lead to similar outcomes
  • Explain why differences, if any, should not change the result
  • Use analogies to demonstrate how established rules apply to new situations

Distinguishing cases

  • Identify relevant factual or legal differences between the current case and precedents
  • Explain why these differences are significant enough to warrant a different outcome
  • Analyze how the distinguishing factors relate to the underlying rationale of the rule
  • Consider policy implications of treating the cases differently
  • Propose modified or new rules to account for the distinguishing factors

Policy considerations

  • Identify the broader societal goals or values underlying the legal rule
  • Consider how different interpretations or applications of the rule align with these policies
  • Analyze potential consequences of various rule applications
  • Balance competing policy interests when multiple considerations are at stake
  • Use policy arguments to support preferred interpretations or outcomes

Testing extracted rules

  • ensures their accuracy, consistency, and applicability
  • This process helps refine legal analysis and strengthen arguments
  • Thorough rule testing leads to more reliable legal conclusions and predictions

Consistency with precedent

  • Compare the extracted rule with established precedents in the same jurisdiction
  • Ensure the rule aligns with higher court decisions on the same or similar issues
  • Identify any apparent conflicts with existing case law and attempt to reconcile them
  • Consider how the rule fits within the broader legal framework of the area of law
  • Examine whether the rule represents a logical evolution of existing legal principles

Logical coherence

  • Analyze the internal logic of the extracted rule for consistency and clarity
  • Ensure all elements or factors of the rule are clearly defined and relate to each other logically
  • Identify any circular reasoning or contradictions within the rule
  • Test the rule against hypothetical scenarios to check for logical gaps or inconsistencies
  • Consider whether the rule can be applied consistently across various factual situations

Practical implications

  • Evaluate how the extracted rule would function in real-world legal practice
  • Consider the ease or difficulty of applying the rule to future cases
  • Assess whether the rule provides clear guidance for judges, lawyers, and parties
  • Analyze potential unintended consequences of strict rule application
  • Determine if the rule aligns with broader legal and societal goals in its practical effects

Presenting extracted rules

  • Effective presentation of extracted rules is crucial for clear legal communication
  • Well-presented rules enhance the persuasiveness of legal arguments
  • Proper rule presentation demonstrates mastery of legal analysis and writing skills

Clear and concise language

  • State the rule using precise and unambiguous legal terminology
  • Avoid unnecessary jargon or overly complex sentence structures
  • Use active voice to enhance clarity and directness
  • Break down complex rules into manageable components or steps
  • Ensure the rule statement is complete yet concise, capturing all essential elements

Supporting authority

  • Cite relevant cases, statutes, or regulations that establish or support the rule
  • Use proper legal citation formats (Bluebook, ALWD) for all references
  • Indicate the weight of authority (binding vs. persuasive) for each source
  • Provide parenthetical explanations for key cases to show their relevance
  • Balance the use of authority to support the rule without overwhelming the reader

Addressing counterarguments

  • Anticipate potential challenges to the extracted rule or its application
  • Acknowledge alternative interpretations or conflicting authorities
  • Explain why the presented rule is superior to other possible formulations
  • Address limitations or exceptions to the rule proactively
  • Demonstrate how the rule remains valid despite potential counterarguments

Key Terms to Review (39)

ALWD Citation Manual: The ALWD Citation Manual is a comprehensive guide designed to assist legal professionals and students in properly citing legal documents and sources in their writing. It emphasizes consistency, clarity, and the importance of accurate citations in legal writing, making it a crucial resource for ensuring that legal arguments are well-supported and easily verifiable.
Analogical Reasoning: Analogical reasoning is a method of reasoning in which one infers a conclusion based on the similarities between two different situations, cases, or concepts. This approach plays a vital role in law, as it helps in drawing parallels between established precedents and current cases, thereby influencing judicial opinions and legal arguments.
Bluebook Citation: Bluebook citation refers to a specific style of legal citation outlined in 'The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation,' which provides guidelines for referencing legal documents, cases, statutes, and secondary sources. This system is essential for ensuring clarity and consistency in legal writing, particularly when engaging with various forms of law and their interpretations.
Canons of Construction: Canons of construction are established principles and rules that guide judges and legal professionals in interpreting statutes, regulations, and legal texts. These canons help clarify the meaning of ambiguous terms and phrases, ensuring that laws are applied consistently and fairly across different cases. They connect to various aspects of legal analysis, providing a framework for understanding legislative intent, applying the plain meaning rule, and conducting textual analysis.
Case law precedents: Case law precedents are judicial decisions made in previous court cases that establish a rule or principle used in future cases. These precedents are crucial in the legal system as they provide consistency and predictability by guiding judges in making decisions based on similar facts and legal issues from prior rulings.
Concurring Opinions: Concurring opinions are written opinions by one or more judges or justices who agree with the decision reached by the majority but want to express their own reasons for agreeing. These opinions can add depth to the legal reasoning of a case and may highlight different aspects of the law or social issues that are relevant to the case at hand. They are important because they can influence future cases and provide insights into varying judicial perspectives.
Conflicting Rules: Conflicting rules are legal principles or regulations that produce opposing outcomes when applied to the same situation, creating uncertainty in legal decision-making. These rules can arise from different jurisdictions, statutes, or case law, and their existence can complicate the application of law, leading to confusion and the need for judicial interpretation or legislative clarification.
Consistency with precedent: Consistency with precedent refers to the legal principle that courts should follow the rulings and interpretations established in previous cases when making decisions in new cases. This concept promotes stability and predictability in the law, ensuring that similar cases are treated similarly, which helps maintain public trust in the legal system.
Creac: Creac is an acronym that stands for Conclusion, Rule, Explanation, Application, and Counterargument. It serves as a structured framework for legal writing and analysis, allowing students and practitioners to present their arguments clearly and logically. This method is especially useful in extracting legal rules from cases, helping to break down complex legal issues into manageable parts.
Dicta: Dicta refers to statements made by a judge in a legal opinion that are not essential to the decision of the case. These remarks, while potentially insightful or informative, do not carry the same legal weight as the holding of the case. Understanding dicta is important because it can provide context or illustrate the reasoning behind a ruling, but it should not be confused with the binding legal principles established by the case's holding.
Discretionary Rules: Discretionary rules are guidelines that grant decision-makers the flexibility to make choices based on their judgment and interpretation of the circumstances. These rules differ from mandatory rules, which impose strict requirements that must be followed without exception. Discretionary rules play a crucial role in legal contexts, where they allow for interpretation and application that can adapt to unique situations.
Dissenting Opinions: Dissenting opinions are written statements by judges who disagree with the majority's decision in a court case. These opinions provide alternative interpretations of the law or different reasoning for the outcome, showcasing the diversity of judicial thought. Understanding dissenting opinions is crucial because they can influence future legal interpretations and may eventually become the basis for changing laws or policies.
Distinguishing Cases: Distinguishing cases is a legal technique used to differentiate a current case from previous cases based on specific facts or legal issues, leading to a different conclusion or ruling. This process helps ensure that the law is applied correctly by acknowledging that while precedents exist, they may not always apply due to unique circumstances in the current matter.
Elements: In legal writing and analysis, 'elements' refer to the fundamental components or criteria that must be established to prove a legal claim or defense. Each legal rule or doctrine is often broken down into specific elements that must be satisfied for a case to succeed, and understanding these elements is essential for effectively applying the law to factual situations.
Exceptions: Exceptions are specific circumstances or conditions that modify or alter the general application of a legal rule. They serve as important qualifications within legal frameworks, allowing for flexibility and fairness in the application of laws, recognizing that not all situations fit neatly into established rules. Understanding exceptions is crucial for accurately interpreting legal texts and assessing how they apply in various scenarios.
Express Rules: Express rules are clearly articulated legal guidelines or principles that are explicitly stated in legislation, regulations, or case law. These rules are meant to provide straightforward direction on how to interpret and apply the law, leaving little room for ambiguity or misinterpretation.
Factors: In the context of legal research and writing, factors refer to the various elements or considerations that influence the interpretation and application of legal rules. These can include the specific circumstances of a case, precedents from similar cases, and the statutory language involved. Understanding these factors is crucial when extracting legal rules, as they help in analyzing how laws operate in different contexts and guide legal reasoning.
Holding: In legal terms, a holding is the court's determination of a matter of law pivotal to its decision in a case. It reflects the legal principle that the court establishes based on the facts presented and forms the foundation for future cases. Understanding a holding is crucial as it allows for the extraction of legal rules, which can then be applied to similar legal issues, and differentiates it from other statements made in judicial opinions.
Implied Rules: Implied rules are legal principles that are not explicitly stated in the text of a law or legal document but can be inferred from its language, purpose, or context. These rules help to fill gaps and provide clarity in legal reasoning by allowing courts and practitioners to derive meaning and intent beyond the written word, ensuring that the law functions effectively in various situations.
IRAC: IRAC stands for Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion, and it's a structured approach to legal analysis that helps organize thoughts when dealing with legal problems. This framework breaks down a legal issue into manageable parts, making it easier to understand and articulate complex arguments. It serves as a tool for both case briefing and extracting legal rules, guiding students and professionals through the process of analyzing cases and applying relevant laws effectively.
Legal Treatises: Legal treatises are comprehensive written works that systematically explore specific areas of law, providing in-depth analysis, interpretation, and commentary. They serve as valuable resources for legal practitioners, scholars, and students by consolidating existing laws, case law, and legal principles to facilitate a deeper understanding of legal concepts and their application.
Legislative Intent: Legislative intent refers to the purpose and objectives that lawmakers had in mind when enacting a particular statute. Understanding legislative intent is crucial for interpreting laws, as it helps clarify the goals behind the language used and provides context for how a law should be applied in practice.
Limitations: Limitations refer to the constraints or restrictions that define the boundaries within which legal rules apply and operate. Understanding these limitations is crucial when extracting legal rules because it helps clarify how far a rule extends, what exceptions might exist, and the context in which a rule can be applied. This understanding allows for more accurate legal analysis and better application of laws to specific situations.
Logical Coherence: Logical coherence refers to the quality of a set of statements, arguments, or rules being consistent and logically connected to each other. This concept is crucial when extracting legal rules as it ensures that the rules derived from case law, statutes, or legal principles are not contradictory and can be applied consistently across various situations. In legal contexts, maintaining logical coherence helps create a clearer understanding of how laws function together and aids in their application in real-life scenarios.
Majority Opinions: A majority opinion is a judicial opinion agreed to by more than half of the members of a court, articulating the reasoning behind the court's decision on a case. This type of opinion serves as the binding precedent for lower courts and provides the legal rationale that explains how the law applies to the facts of the case. Majority opinions play a crucial role in shaping legal rules and guiding future decisions.
Mandatory Rules: Mandatory rules are legal standards that must be followed and cannot be altered or waived by the parties involved. These rules ensure compliance with fundamental legal principles and protect public interests, maintaining order within the legal system. They often apply across various areas of law, including contracts, torts, and statutory regulations, ensuring that certain minimum standards are upheld regardless of individual agreements.
Overturning precedent: Overturning precedent refers to the legal process in which a court decides to nullify or change the established legal rule or principle set by an earlier case. This practice is significant as it reflects the ability of the judicial system to adapt and evolve based on new interpretations of the law or changing societal values. When a precedent is overturned, it can lead to new legal standards and influence future court decisions, highlighting the dynamic nature of law.
Plain Meaning Rule: The plain meaning rule is a legal principle that suggests that when interpreting a statute or legal text, courts should first look at the ordinary meaning of the language used. This approach emphasizes understanding words in their most common usage to discern the intention of the lawmakers without delving into other interpretative methods or legislative history.
Policy Considerations: Policy considerations refer to the underlying principles, values, and practical implications that influence decision-making and law creation. These considerations often weigh the potential effects of legal rules on society, ensuring that laws serve not just technical functions but also social justice and public interest. By examining policy considerations, legal professionals can understand the broader impact of legislation and judicial decisions on various stakeholders.
Practical Implications: Practical implications refer to the real-world effects or consequences that arise from applying legal rules or principles. These implications help to understand how laws function outside of theoretical contexts, influencing individuals, businesses, and society at large. They provide insights into how legal decisions impact daily life, guiding practitioners in interpreting laws and advising clients effectively.
Ratio decidendi: Ratio decidendi refers to the legal principle or rule that is derived from a court's decision and serves as binding precedent for future cases. Understanding this concept is crucial as it helps in extracting legal rules from case law, distinguishing between what constitutes a holding versus mere obiter dictum, and analyzing the text of judicial opinions. This principle also plays a vital role in identifying the legal issues at stake and in grasping complex legal jargon.
Regulations: Regulations are rules or directives made and maintained by an authority, typically at the federal or state level, that govern the behavior of individuals and organizations. They are designed to implement laws passed by legislatures and provide detailed guidance on how those laws should be applied. Regulations play a crucial role in ensuring compliance with legal standards, promoting safety, and protecting public interests, while also being a key aspect of primary sources of law, accessible through online legal databases, and critical in extracting legal rules for effective legal research.
Restatements of Law: Restatements of Law are authoritative summaries of the common law in specific areas, created by the American Law Institute (ALI). These restatements aim to clarify, simplify, and organize existing legal principles, providing a clear framework that judges, lawyers, and scholars can reference. By consolidating and restating legal rules, they help in extracting and understanding complex legal doctrines.
Rule Synthesis: Rule synthesis is the process of combining various legal rules and principles from different sources to create a cohesive and comprehensive understanding of the law applicable to a specific issue. This method helps legal practitioners to interpret statutes, case law, and other legal texts more effectively by integrating relevant rules into a unified framework. This approach is essential for ensuring that legal analysis reflects the complexity of real-world scenarios where multiple legal rules may interact.
Secondary sources: Secondary sources are materials that analyze, interpret, or critique primary legal materials, such as statutes, regulations, or case law. They provide context, commentary, and summaries that help in understanding the law, making them invaluable tools for legal research and writing.
Stare decisis: Stare decisis is a legal principle that mandates courts to follow precedents set by previous decisions when ruling on cases with similar facts. This doctrine promotes consistency and predictability in the law, guiding judges in their decision-making process and influencing how legal arguments are framed.
Statutes: Statutes are written laws enacted by a legislative body, such as Congress or state legislatures. They serve as primary sources of law, establishing legal standards and regulations that govern behavior within a jurisdiction and providing a framework for legal interpretation and enforcement.
Statutory Interpretation: Statutory interpretation is the process by which courts analyze and apply legislation to determine its meaning and implications. This involves understanding legislative intent, the language of the statute, and how it fits within the broader legal framework, impacting how laws are applied in specific cases.
Testing Extracted Rules: Testing extracted rules refers to the process of evaluating and verifying legal rules that have been derived from statutes, case law, or other legal texts to ensure they are correctly formulated and applicable in various contexts. This involves examining the clarity, applicability, and consistency of the rules to confirm that they can be reliably used in legal reasoning and argumentation. By rigorously testing these rules, legal practitioners can ensure that their interpretations align with established legal principles and are ready for application in real-world scenarios.
© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.
AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.
Back
Practice QuizGlossary
Practice QuizGlossary
Next guide