1. Identification of the precise legal issue(s) presented by the facts 2. Statement of the relevant legal principlesz'rules related to the issues identified 3. Analysis and discussion of the particular fact situation (i.e. application of the legal principles to your situation) - In analyzing the situation, it will be helpful to view the issue from the viewpoint of the plaintiff and the defendant. 4. Conclusion - how would you rule in this situation (This is the least important factor). FACT PATTERNS 2I3: FOR PURPOSES OF THIS QUESTION, YOU SHOULD TREAT EACH THEORY SEPARATELY AND ADDRESS EACH THEORY AS THOUGH IT WERE A SEPARATE QUESTION. Rob is considering moving into a new apartment. While showing him the apartment, the landlord tells Rob that he \"is planning to repaint the apartment and to install new carpeting". Several days later, Rob signs a twelve (12) month lease at a monthly rental of $1,000. There is no mention in the lease about the repainting or the recarpeting. When Rob moves in, he finds that the apartment has been neither repainted or recarpeted. When Rob requests that the landlord do so, he refuses. Rob has this work done personally (without the landlord's knowledge or consent) at a cost of $6,000. Both Rob and the landlord agree that because of the Parol Evidence Rule, repainting and new carpeting are not part of the lease agreement and that the landlord has not breached the lease agreement by failing to provide them. Instead, Rob sues the landlord for the $6,000 on two separate independent theories: (1) the landlord obtained the lease through misrepresentation andfor fraud; andfor, (2) the landlord will be