When researching primary authority, what is the first step?

The first step in researching primary authority is to look for factually similar cases. This approach is crucial because understanding existing case law that closely resembles the current legal issue at hand provides a foundation for analysis. Identifying relevant cases helps clarify how courts have interpreted and applied the law to similar situations, thereby informing the researcher's understanding of how to argue a position or anticipate outcomes.

In legal research, the process often begins with establishing a strong factual basis. By examining cases that share similar facts, a researcher can assess how past judgments may influence the current matter. This step is integral in developing legal arguments and in identifying precedents that may support a particular interpretation of the law.

While reviewing secondary sources, identifying statutes, and consulting legal textbooks are all valuable parts of the legal research process, they typically follow the initial examination of factually similar cases. These secondary sources can provide context, analysis, or statutes that might be relevant, but they do not replace the need to first understand how courts have navigated similar issues. Thus, starting with factually similar cases equips the researcher with essential insights into the primary authority relevant to their legal challenge.