As a summer associate researching a fraud claim under Texas law, which step should follow reviewing secondary sources?

After reviewing secondary sources, the next logical step would involve consulting primary legal sources to ensure that the information is accurate and up-to-date before proceeding with any legal analysis or drafting. Using KeyCite or Shepard's is an effective way to find relevant cases because these tools allow a researcher to verify the status of cases and find additional case law that pertains to the issue at hand.

This step is critical in establishing a solid foundation for understanding how courts have interpreted the fraudulent claims under Texas law, which is necessary for forming a well-reasoned legal argument or memorandum. It also aids in ensuring that a researcher is referencing cases that are still good law, helping avoid reliance on outdated or overruled decisions that could undermine their analysis.

The other options, while potentially relevant steps in the research process, do not directly follow the logical sequence of moving from secondary to primary sources as effectively as using KeyCite or Shepard's does. This approach emphasizes the transition from theoretical understanding to practical application, which is essential in legal research.