A legal research memo answers a question a colleague actually asked, usually under time pressure and usually because a decision depends on it. Most weak memos fail at exactly that point: they summarize research instead of answering the question, and the partner has to construct the conclusion themselves.
This is written for the associate or paralegal who has been handed a question and needs the memo to be useful on first read. It sets out the structure, shows what each section looks like with a live example, and covers the drafting habits that get a memo sent back.
What Is the Structure of a Legal Research Memo?
A legal memorandum normally contains six sections, in this order:
- Heading — to, from, date, and the matter.
- Question Presented — the legal question, stated in one or two sentences.
- Brief Answer — the conclusion, up front, with the core reason.
- Statement of Facts — the facts the analysis relies on, and only those.
- Discussion — the analysis, usually organized by issue and applying rules to facts.
- Conclusion — the answer again, with what should happen next.
The order matters because of how memos are read. The requesting attorney reads the Question Presented and the Brief Answer, and often nothing else until they need the reasoning. A memo that buries its answer on page four has failed regardless of the research quality.
A Worked Example
Here is the structure with a worked example in each section, taken from a question a litigation team would actually be asked: whether a former employee's non-compete is enforceable in a jurisdiction that requires the restriction to be reasonable in scope.
MEMORANDUM
To: R. Alvarez
From: J. Chen
Date: September 28, 2026
Re: Enforceability of Keller non-compete — Meridian Logistics
Question Presented
One or two sentences, framed as a question, including the legally significant facts. Avoid both the abstract version ("is this non-compete enforceable?") and the version that smuggles in the answer.
Is a two-year non-compete barring a former logistics coordinator from working for any competitor nationwide enforceable where the employee's role was limited to one regional facility and the employer's operations are confined to three states?
Brief Answer
The conclusion first, then the reason, in three or four sentences. Say how confident you are and why.
Probably not as drafted. The nationwide geographic scope is likely unreasonable given that the employer operates in three states and the employee worked at a single facility. A court would most likely find the restriction overbroad; whether it is blue-pencilled to a reasonable area or struck entirely depends on the jurisdiction's severability practice, which is addressed below.
Statement of Facts
Only the facts the Discussion uses, in a neutral voice, with a note where a fact is disputed or unknown. If a fact matters and you do not have it, say so — an unflagged gap becomes an assumption the reader does not know they are relying on.
Keller was employed as a logistics coordinator at Meridian's Fresno facility from March 2023 to August 2026. His signed employment agreement contains a two-year post-termination restriction on working for "any competitor" with no geographic limitation. Meridian operates facilities in California, Nevada, and Arizona. Whether Keller had access to pricing data is disputed; Meridian asserts he did, and Keller's declaration denies it.
Discussion
The analysis. Organize by issue, and inside each issue state the rule, apply it to the facts, address the strongest counterargument, and conclude. Keep one issue per subheading.
A. The geographic scope is likely unreasonable.
Rule — courts enforce post-employment restrictions only so far as reasonably necessary to protect a legitimate interest, assessed by duration, geography, and the scope of restricted activity.
Application — the restriction is nationwide while the employer operates in three states, and Keller's duties were confined to one facility. Nothing in the record ties his role to a national market.
Counterargument — Meridian will argue pricing-data access justifies broader protection. That argument depends on a disputed fact, and even if credited, access to pricing data does not by itself support a nationwide bar.
Conclusion — the geographic scope is likely unenforceable as written.
Conclusion
Restate the answer and say what to do next. The "next" is what makes a memo actionable rather than academic.
The restriction is likely unenforceable as drafted. Recommend (1) obtaining Keller's facility access records to resolve the pricing-data dispute, and (2) assessing whether the agreement's severability clause supports narrowing rather than invalidation before we advise on enforcement.
Mistakes That Get a Memo Rewritten
Burying the answer
If the Brief Answer does not answer the question, the memo does not work. Readers should be able to stop after it.
Summarizing cases instead of applying them
A paragraph describing what happened in a case is research notes. Analysis states the rule and applies it to your facts. If a case description does not end in an application sentence, it is not pulling weight.
Facts in the Discussion that never appeared in the Statement of Facts
A common and corrosive habit. Every fact the analysis relies on belongs in the Statement of Facts, so the reader can check the premises in one place.
Hiding the weakness
The point of an internal memo is for the requesting attorney to learn the bad news from you rather than from opposing counsel. State the strongest counterargument plainly and say why it does or does not prevail.
Omitting what you could not determine
Unknown facts, unsettled questions, and unverified assumptions belong in the memo explicitly. Silence reads as certainty.
Drafting the First Pass
Most of the effort in a memo is the analysis, but a real share of the time goes into structure and assembling the facts from the file. Legal drafting software produces a first-pass memorandum in the structure above from the parameters you supply, which leaves the drafting time for the Discussion — where judgment actually lives.
One caveat worth stating plainly: Case Clarity drafts from the materials and inputs you give it. It does not perform legal research or retrieve authority, so the cases, statutes, and current law in any memo are yours to supply, verify, and cite. If the Statement of Facts needs assembling from a document set, document review software extracts the facts with a reference back to the page each came from.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long should a legal memo be?
As short as the question allows. A single-issue question often resolves in two to three pages; a multi-issue question with unsettled law may need eight to ten. Length should follow the number of genuine issues, not the volume of research performed.
What is the difference between a legal memo and a brief?
Audience and purpose. A memorandum is internal and predictive: it tells your own team what the law probably is, including the weaknesses. A brief is external and persuasive: it argues a position to a court. The same research supports both, but a memo that reads like a brief is not giving the reader what they need.
Should a legal memo include a conclusion if it already has a brief answer?
Yes, and they do different jobs. The Brief Answer gives the conclusion before the reasoning; the Conclusion restates it after the analysis and adds the recommended next steps. Dropping the Conclusion tends to leave the memo without any recommendation at all.
How should the Question Presented be phrased?
As a single question that includes the legally significant facts, specific enough that the answer turns on those facts rather than on a general proposition. "Is the non-compete enforceable?" is too abstract; adding the duration, geography, and role makes it answerable.