Full prompt text, the input and verification checklists, and a sample output.
No account needed to read or copy these. Create a free account to unlock all 152.
Intake questionnaire generator — any matter type
OPEN SAMPLE Builds a matter-specific intake questionnaire to send before the first consultation. Reach for it when a matter type walks in that your standard form was not built for.
[PRACTICE AREA] ·[STATE] ·[MATTER TYPE]
## Context
You are an intake specialist for a solo law firm. The attorney practices [PRACTICE AREA] in [STATE]. A prospective client contacted the firm about a [MATTER TYPE] matter. The questionnaire goes out before the first consultation so the attorney can run a conflict check, spot deadlines, and prepare.
## Task
Draft an intake questionnaire for this matter type. Use these sections: contact and identity; adverse and related parties; facts of the matter; key dates and deadlines; prior counsel and pending proceedings; documents to bring; goals and expectations. Write 25 to 40 questions total.
## Standards
- Plain language a non-lawyer understands at first read. If a legal term is unavoidable, define it in one sentence.
- One fact per question. No compound questions.
- The adverse-parties section must ask for full legal names, maiden or former names, and any businesses the parties own or control. This feeds the conflict check.
- Include questions that surface deadline risk: the date of the incident or transaction, and whether the client has been served with or has filed any court papers, with dates.
- Mark any question that depends on state law with [ATTORNEY REVIEW].
- Output a numbered list under bold section headings. No cover note, no closing.
If the matter type is too vague to draft useful questions, ask what you need before drafting.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Practice area and state.
- The matter type in one or two sentences — keep it generic; this prompt needs no client-identifying data.
- Questions your current form already covers that you want kept.
- Your delivery format: web form, PDF, or email body.
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Adverse-party questions ask for full names, former names, and related entities — your conflict check is only as good as these answers.
- At least two questions pin down the dates that control limitations periods.
- Every [ATTORNEY REVIEW] flag checked against your state's law before the form goes out.
- No question asks the prospect for another person's privileged or sealed information.
- Nothing in the form implies representation has begun — it must read as pre-engagement screening.
- Read it aloud once. Cut any question a nervous non-lawyer would misread.
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs (residential landlord-tenant deposit dispute, Texas):
**Section 2 — Adverse and Related Parties**
4. What is the full legal name of your landlord, exactly as it appears on your lease?
5. Has your landlord used any other name or business name you know of? List each one.
6. Who is the property management company, if any?
7. What is the full address of the rental property?
**Section 4 — Key Dates and Deadlines**
12. On what date did you move out of the property?
13. On what date did you give your landlord your forwarding address in writing? [ATTORNEY REVIEW — Texas Property Code § 92.103 ties the 30-day refund deadline to this date.]
14. Have you received any portion of your deposit back? If so, how much and when?
15. Have you received an itemized list of deductions? If so, on what date?
16. Have you or the landlord filed anything in court about this dispute? Give the date and court if yes.
CUSTOMIZATION Swap the section list for transactional matters — replace key dates and deadlines with transaction timeline and closing date. Contingency practices should add a damages and treatment section. If you run intake through a web form, ask for output as field labels with input types instead of a numbered list.
Engagement letter — hourly representation
OPEN SAMPLE Drafts a complete hourly engagement letter: scope, rates, retainer, trust handling, and termination. Use it once the conflict check clears and before substantive work starts.
[ATTORNEY NAME] ·[STATE] ·[CLIENT NAME] ·[MATTER DESCRIPTION] ·[HOURLY RATE] ·[RETAINER AMOUNT] ·[BILLING FREQUENCY]
## Context
You are drafting an engagement letter for [ATTORNEY NAME], a solo attorney licensed in [STATE]. The client is [CLIENT NAME]. The matter: [MATTER DESCRIPTION]. Billing: [HOURLY RATE] per hour, a [RETAINER AMOUNT] retainer deposited in the firm's trust account, billed [BILLING FREQUENCY].
## Task
Draft the engagement letter. Required sections: identification of the client and matter; scope of representation, including what is excluded; fees and costs, separating the hourly fee from expenses; retainer and trust account handling, including replenishment and refund of unearned funds; billing and payment terms; client responsibilities; how either party may end the representation; and file retention. Close with signature blocks for attorney and client.
## Standards
- Plain English. A client reads this once and signs it — write for that reading.
- The scope section names the specific matter and states that new or related matters need a new agreement.
- State that the retainer is the client's money until earned and that unearned amounts are refunded.
- No outcome promises anywhere. Include a sentence that the attorney cannot guarantee results.
- Mark anything that depends on state trust-account or fee rules with [ATTORNEY REVIEW].
- 600 to 900 words. Letter format with a letterhead placeholder.
If any billing term is missing — rate, retainer, costs treatment — ask rather than insert a default.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Client name, matter description, and the exact scope you agreed to in consultation.
- Rate, retainer amount, billing cycle, and how you charge costs: copies, filing fees, experts.
- Your state's trust account rule at hand for the [ATTORNEY REVIEW] pass.
- Confidentiality: the matter description may identify the client. Remove identifying details and add them back after, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance per ABA Formal Opinion 512.
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Scope matches what you told the client in consultation — a scope gap here is a malpractice trap.
- Retainer and trust language complies with your state's version of Rule 1.15. Check it against the rule text, not memory.
- Fee terms satisfy Rule 1.5, in writing where your state requires it.
- No sentence promises or implies an outcome.
- Termination and file-retention terms match your state bar's requirements and your actual practice.
- Excluded work — appeals, collections, related claims — is stated, not assumed.
- You read the whole letter before sending. AI output is never sent unverified.
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs (Dana Whitfield representing Janet Okafor, boundary dispute, $300/hr, $3,000 retainer):
Re: Engagement of Whitfield Law PLLC — Okafor boundary dispute
Dear Ms. Okafor:
Thank you for choosing this firm. This letter sets the terms of our work together. Please read it fully, then sign and return one copy.
Scope of representation. The firm will represent you in your boundary and encroachment dispute with the owner of the parcel at 412 Harlow Road, including negotiation and, if needed, filing suit in the county district court. This engagement does not include any appeal, any claim against your title insurer, or any unrelated matter. New matters need a new written agreement.
Fees. My rate is $300 per hour, billed in tenths of an hour. Paralegal time bills at $110 per hour. You will receive an itemized statement each month.
Retainer and trust account. You will deposit $3,000 in the firm's trust account [ATTORNEY REVIEW — confirm IOLTA language your state rule requires]. That money remains yours until earned. I will bill against it and ask you to replenish it when it falls below $1,000. Any unearned balance is refunded when the matter ends.
No guarantee. I will work diligently on your matter. No attorney can promise a result, and I do not.
CUSTOMIZATION Add your state bar's fee-arbitration notice if required — several states mandate it. Business clients need a paragraph naming who can give instructions. If you use evergreen retainers or alternative billing on some matters, build one variant per billing model rather than editing each time. Do not label any retainer nonrefundable without checking your state's rule.
Demand letter — unpaid invoice
OPEN SAMPLE Drafts a first demand letter for an unpaid commercial invoice or account balance. Reach for it when a client wants payment without filing suit yet.
[ATTORNEY NAME] ·[JURISDICTION] ·[CLIENT NAME] ·[CLIENT BUSINESS TYPE] ·[DEBTOR NAME] ·[AMOUNT OWED] ·[INVOICE NUMBERS] ·[GOODS OR SERVICES PROVIDED] ·[DUE DATE] ·[PRIOR ATTEMPTS] ·[CONTRACT OR INVOICE TERMS, INCLUDING INTEREST AND FEE PROVISIONS] ·[DEADLINE]
## Context
You are drafting correspondence for [ATTORNEY NAME], a [JURISDICTION] attorney representing [CLIENT NAME], a [CLIENT BUSINESS TYPE]. The debtor, [DEBTOR NAME], owes [AMOUNT OWED] on invoice(s) [INVOICE NUMBERS] for [GOODS OR SERVICES PROVIDED], due [DUE DATE]. Prior collection attempts: [PRIOR ATTEMPTS]. Governing terms: [CONTRACT OR INVOICE TERMS, INCLUDING INTEREST AND FEE PROVISIONS].
## Task
Draft a demand letter to the debtor seeking full payment within [DEADLINE]. The letter must:
- Identify the debt: amounts, invoice numbers, dates, and what was provided.
- State the contractual basis for the obligation.
- Demand a specific sum by a specific date, with a payment-instructions placeholder.
- Add interest or fees only if the terms above support them, and show the calculation.
- State the consequence of nonpayment in one sentence — suit, without bluster.
- Reserve all rights and remedies.
## Standards
One page, business letter format with letterhead, date, recipient, and re-line placeholders. Firm and professional. No threats beyond stating available civil remedies. No rhetorical questions, no all-caps, no characterization of the debtor's conduct as fraudulent or criminal. Do not cite statutes or case law; where a statutory citation may belong, insert [VERIFY: describe what to check]. If the debt could be consumer debt rather than commercial, stop and say so — FDCPA and state collection statutes change the rules. If any required fact is missing or unclear, ask before drafting.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Invoice copies with numbers, amounts, and due dates.
- The contract or credit terms that set interest, late fees, or attorney-fee recovery.
- Dates and substance of prior payment demands.
- Confirmation the debt is commercial, not consumer — FDCPA and state collection statutes change what you can say.
- Remove client-identifying details, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting client data.
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Every dollar figure matches the invoices. Re-run the math yourself, including interest.
- Interest and fee demands trace to a contract clause or a statute you verified in the official code — never demand what the terms do not give you.
- The payment deadline is a real business day and satisfies any notice period the contract requires.
- No language that could read as a threat of criminal referral — check your state's rule against threatening prosecution to gain advantage in a civil matter.
- If the debtor is an individual, confirm FDCPA and your state collection-practices act do not apply before sending.
- All placeholders — letterhead, recipient address, payment instructions, re-line — are replaced.
- The letter does not waive or undercut acceleration, default, or fee-shifting rights in the underlying contract.
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
Re: Demand for Payment — Meridian Supply Co. Invoice No. 2417
Dear Mr. Okafor:
This firm represents Meridian Supply Co. I write about the unpaid balance on Invoice No. 2417.
On February 3, 2026, Meridian delivered 60 pallets of commercial roofing membrane to Brightline Contractors LLC under the credit agreement dated January 12, 2026. Invoice No. 2417, in the amount of $18,450.00, was due March 5, 2026. Despite Meridian's written reminders of March 20 and April 14, no payment has been received.
Under Section 6 of the credit agreement, past-due balances accrue interest at 1.5% per month. As of June 10, 2026, the balance is $19,280.25, inclusive of accrued interest. [VERIFY: confirm interest calculation against Section 6 before sending.]
Demand is made for payment of $19,280.25 on or before June 24, 2026. Payment may be made by [PAYMENT INSTRUCTIONS].
If payment is not received by that date, Meridian has authorized this firm to pursue all available remedies, including suit for the balance, accruing interest, and attorney fees under Section 9 of the agreement.
This letter is not a complete statement of Meridian's rights, all of which are expressly reserved.
Sincerely,
Dana Whitfield
CUSTOMIZATION For consumer debtors this prompt is not enough — add FDCPA validation language and check your state act before adapting it. Adjust the payment window to local custom; 10 to 30 days is typical. Add a personal-guaranty paragraph when a principal signed one. Collection-heavy practices can save the filled Context block as a reusable template per client.
Client status update letter — litigation matter, by stage
OPEN SAMPLE Drafts a plain-English status letter keyed to where the case sits — pleadings, discovery, motions, or trial prep. Reach for it when the monthly update is due and you have twenty minutes, not ninety.
PRACTICE AREA ·CLIENT DESCRIPTION ·MATTER NAME ·CURRENT STAGE ·DEVELOPMENTS SINCE LAST UPDATE ·NEXT STEPS AND EXPECTED DATES ·CLIENT ACTION ITEMS ·MERITS NOTE
## Context
You draft client correspondence for a [PRACTICE AREA] attorney at a small firm. The client is [CLIENT DESCRIPTION — sophistication, litigation experience, anxiety level]. The matter is [MATTER NAME], now at the [CURRENT STAGE] stage. Clients of this firm get updates they can understand without calling the office.
## Task
Draft a status update letter to the client covering:
- What has happened since the last update: [DEVELOPMENTS SINCE LAST UPDATE]
- What happens next and when: [NEXT STEPS AND EXPECTED DATES]
- Anything the client must do: [CLIENT ACTION ITEMS, OR "NONE"]
- A one-sentence answer to the question every client has: where does my case stand?
## Standards
- One page or less. Plain English. Define any legal term you cannot avoid, in-line — for example, "interrogatories (written questions the other side must answer under oath)."
- Lead with the bottom line, not the procedural history.
- State dates the court controls as estimates. Do not promise outcomes or timelines the attorney does not control.
- Do not characterize the merits unless [MERITS NOTE] says to, and then use only the language given.
- Close with how to reach the attorney and when the next update will come.
- If the stage, developments, or next steps are unclear or conflict with each other, ask before drafting. Do not invent procedural events.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Current docket status and any filings since the last update
- Real dates: deadlines, hearing settings, discovery cutoffs — pulled from your calendar, not memory
- Anything you need from the client (documents, deposition availability)
- The date and content of your last update, so the letter does not repeat it
- Remove client-identifying details, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting client data
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Every date matches the docket or your calendar — AI states estimated dates as fixed ones
- No promised outcome or timeline you do not control
- Stage terminology fits your court — "case management conference" and "scheduling conference" are not interchangeable everywhere
- In-line definitions are accurate, not loose paraphrases
- Action items match what you already told the client by phone, if you called first
- Nothing contradicts your engagement letter on scope or fees
- The letter does not concede fault for any delay that was not yours
- You have read the whole letter before it goes out — ABA Formal Opinion 512 (2024) puts responsibility for AI-assisted work product on you, not the tool
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
"Dear Mr. Casey:
Here is where your case stands: discovery is underway, on schedule, and nothing has changed our assessment since my last letter.
Since April, we served written discovery on Meridian Supply Co. and received their responses on May 19. We are reviewing about 900 pages of documents they produced. Two items stand out, and I will discuss them with you by phone next week.
Next steps: Meridian's lawyers will take your deposition — sworn testimony, recorded by a court reporter — likely in late July. We will prepare together before that date, and I will be in the room. The court has also set a status conference for August 14. You do not need to attend.
What I need from you: the maintenance records we discussed. Please send them by June 20.
Your next written update will come in early July, sooner if anything significant happens. Call my office with questions any time.
Sincerely,
Dana Whitfield"
CUSTOMIZATION Match [CURRENT STAGE] vocabulary to your court — state motion practice differs from federal. For institutional clients, drop the in-line definitions and add a fees-to-date line. Contingency plaintiffs need less procedure and more "what this means for your recovery." Save your standard [NEXT STEPS] language per stage and this becomes a five-minute task each month.
First-pass contract draft — mutual NDA
OPEN SAMPLE Produces an editable mutual nondisclosure agreement when two parties will exchange confidential information before a deal. Reach for it at the start of any negotiation, joint venture evaluation, or vendor diligence.
[GOVERNING STATE] ·[PURPOSE OF DISCLOSURE] ·[PARTY A — NAME, ENTITY TYPE, STATE OF FORMATION] ·[PARTY B — NAME, ENTITY TYPE, STATE OF FORMATION] ·[AGREEMENT TERM] ·[SURVIVAL PERIOD]
## Context
You are drafting for a [GOVERNING STATE]-licensed attorney. Two parties will exchange confidential information while they evaluate [PURPOSE OF DISCLOSURE]. The parties: [PARTY A — NAME, ENTITY TYPE, STATE OF FORMATION] and [PARTY B — NAME, ENTITY TYPE, STATE OF FORMATION]. Both sides will disclose and receive.
## Task
Draft a mutual nondisclosure agreement I can edit into a final document. Include: a definition of Confidential Information; standard exclusions (publicly known, already known, independently developed, rightfully received from a third party); use limited to the stated purpose; a compelled-disclosure carve-out with prior notice; a term of [AGREEMENT TERM] with confidentiality obligations surviving [SURVIVAL PERIOD] after disclosure; return-or-destroy obligations on request; no license granted; no obligation to enter the contemplated transaction; injunctive relief without bond; governing law and exclusive venue in [GOVERNING STATE]; counterparts and signature blocks.
## Standards
- Number every section. Use defined terms consistently.
- Keep obligations symmetrical. Flag any clause that favors one side.
- Plain contract English. No witnesseth, no whereas recitals unless I ask.
- Target length: 2 to 4 pages.
- Insert [DRAFTING NOTE: ...] flags wherever state law may change the answer, such as enforceability of long or perpetual confidentiality periods, or trade-secret survival carve-outs.
- Do not invent addresses, dates, or signatory names. Leave bracketed placeholders.
If any required input is missing or ambiguous, ask me before drafting.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Both parties' legal names, entity types, and states of formation
- The deal or evaluation the disclosures support, in one sentence
- Term length and how long confidentiality should survive
- Governing state and preferred venue
- Remove client-identifying details, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting client data (see ABA Formal Opinion 512)
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Confirm every obligation is mutual — AI drafts often slip one-way language (e.g., only 'Recipient' duties) into a mutual form
- Check the Confidential Information definition against what your client will share; oral disclosures and pre-signing disclosures are common gaps
- Confirm the survival period is enforceable in your state and add a trade-secret carve-out if the client has trade secrets
- Look for a residuals clause — if one appears, decide deliberately; it can gut the agreement
- Verify governing law, venue, and injunctive-relief language match your state's standards, not a generic Delaware form
- Check exclusions for a burden-of-proof allocation; add 'as shown by written records' if your client is mainly disclosing
- Read defined terms end to end — AI drafts sometimes define a term once and drift to a synonym later
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
MUTUAL NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT
This Mutual Nondisclosure Agreement (the "Agreement") is entered into as of [DATE] by Meridian Supply Co., a Colorado corporation ("Meridian"), and Harbor Analytics LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Harbor") (each a "Party," together the "Parties").
1. Purpose. The Parties wish to evaluate a potential inventory-analytics engagement (the "Purpose") and may disclose Confidential Information solely for the Purpose.
2. Confidential Information. "Confidential Information" means nonpublic information a Party discloses, whether oral, written, or electronic, that is marked confidential or that a reasonable person would understand to be confidential, including pricing, supplier lists, customer data, and technical specifications.
3. Exclusions. Confidential Information does not include information that: (a) is or becomes publicly available through no fault of the receiving Party; (b) the receiving Party knew before disclosure, as shown by written records; (c) is independently developed without use of Confidential Information; or (d) is rightfully received from a third party without restriction.
7. Term; Survival. This Agreement runs for two (2) years from the Effective Date. Confidentiality obligations survive for three (3) years after each disclosure. [DRAFTING NOTE: Colorado courts enforce reasonable fixed periods; if trade secrets will be shared, add a carve-out extending protection for as long as the information remains a trade secret.]
CUSTOMIZATION Swap the survival structure for a perpetual trade-secret carve-out when the client discloses formulas, code, or processes. For deals with a counterparty abroad, add an export-control and data-protection paragraph. If the disclosure supports M&A diligence, add a non-solicitation of employees and a standstill placeholder. Adjust venue to your client's home county unless leverage says otherwise.
First-pass contract draft — services agreement
OPEN SAMPLE Produces a master services agreement with a statement-of-work structure. Reach for it when a business client engages or provides ongoing professional services.
[GOVERNING STATE] ·[SERVICE PROVIDER — NAME, ENTITY TYPE] ·[SERVICES DESCRIPTION] ·[CLIENT COMPANY — NAME, ENTITY TYPE] ·[WHICH SIDE IS MY CLIENT — provider or customer] ·[FEE STRUCTURE] ·[TERM AND RENEWAL] ·[PAYMENT TERMS] ·[IP OWNERSHIP] ·[LIABILITY CAP] ·[CURE PERIOD] ·[CONVENIENCE NOTICE]
## Context
You are drafting for an attorney in [GOVERNING STATE]. The parties: [SERVICE PROVIDER — NAME, ENTITY TYPE] will provide [SERVICES DESCRIPTION] to [CLIENT COMPANY — NAME, ENTITY TYPE]. My client is the [WHICH SIDE IS MY CLIENT — provider or customer]. Fee structure: [FEE STRUCTURE — hourly, fixed, retainer, milestones]. Term: [TERM AND RENEWAL].
## Task
Draft a services agreement with a master-agreement-plus-SOW structure. Include: services and SOW incorporation mechanics, including which document controls on conflict; performance standards; fees, invoicing, payment terms of [PAYMENT TERMS], and late-payment interest; expenses; change-order procedure; independent contractor status; IP ownership per [IP OWNERSHIP — work made for hire to customer, provider retains with license, or split]; confidentiality; warranties and disclaimer; mutual indemnification for third-party claims; limitation of liability capped at [LIABILITY CAP]; term, termination for cause with a [CURE PERIOD] cure period, termination for convenience on [CONVENIENCE NOTICE] notice; effects of termination and survival; insurance; non-solicitation of personnel; notices; governing law and venue; entire agreement. Attach a one-page SOW template as Exhibit A.
## Standards
- Tilt drafting choices toward my client's side, but keep the agreement signable — flag aggressive terms with [NEGOTIATION FLAG].
- Numbered sections, defined terms, 6 to 10 pages plus the exhibit.
- Plain contract English. Short sentences where the law allows.
- Use [DRAFTING NOTE] flags for state-specific issues, such as work-made-for-hire limits for independent contractors.
If the fee structure, IP position, or my client's side is unclear, ask before drafting.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Both parties' names, entity types, and which side you represent
- A plain description of the services and deliverables
- Fee structure, payment terms, and any cap or budget
- Who must own the work product, decided before drafting
- Governing state
- Remove client-identifying details, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting client data
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Confirm the order-of-precedence clause matches your intent — AI drafts often let SOWs override the master agreement, which lets a project manager amend legal terms
- Check the IP section against state law: pure work-made-for-hire language fails for most contractor deliverables; an assignment clause must back it up
- Verify the liability cap and the indemnity do not cancel each other — confirm whether indemnity obligations sit inside or outside the cap, deliberately
- Confirm termination-for-convenience mechanics include payment for work performed through the effective date
- Check that warranty disclaimers are conspicuous (capitalized or bolded) if your state requires it
- Confirm the non-solicitation clause is enforceable in your state and scoped to personnel who worked on the engagement
- Read Exhibit A against the body — defined terms in the SOW template must match the master agreement
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
2. Statements of Work. The parties may execute one or more statements of work substantially in the form of Exhibit A (each, an "SOW"). Each SOW incorporates this Agreement. If an SOW conflicts with this Agreement, this Agreement controls unless the SOW states the specific section it modifies and is signed by both parties' authorized representatives.
4. Fees; Payment. Crestline Marketing Group LLC ("Provider") shall invoice Meridian Supply Co. ("Customer") monthly in arrears. Customer shall pay undisputed amounts within thirty (30) days of invoice. Undisputed amounts unpaid after that date accrue interest at 1.0% per month or the maximum rate allowed by law, whichever is less. Customer shall raise invoice disputes in writing within fifteen (15) days of receipt.
6. Ownership of Deliverables. Deliverables are works made for hire for Customer to the extent allowed by law. To the extent any Deliverable is not a work made for hire, Provider assigns to Customer all right, title, and interest in the Deliverable upon payment in full. Provider retains its pre-existing tools and methods ("Provider Materials") and grants Customer a perpetual, non-exclusive license to Provider Materials embedded in a Deliverable. [DRAFTING NOTE: Confirm payment-conditioned assignment is acceptable to Customer; some customers require assignment on creation.]
CUSTOMIZATION For provider-side clients, condition IP assignment on full payment and narrow the indemnity to claims the provider's work infringes IP. For customer-side clients, assign IP on creation and add an audit right for hourly billing. Add data-protection terms when the services touch personal information. Replace the SOW structure with a single scope section for one-off engagements.
First set of interrogatories — contract dispute
OPEN SAMPLE Drafts a numbered first set of interrogatories for a breach of contract case, built around your case theory and your jurisdiction's numeric limit. Reach for it after the answer comes in and you know which defenses you have to pin down.
[JURISDICTION] ·[CLIENT ROLE] ·[OPPOSING PARTY] ·[DISPUTE SUMMARY] ·[KEY ISSUES] ·[INTERROGATORY LIMIT]
## Context
You are a litigation drafting assistant for a civil case in [JURISDICTION]. I represent [CLIENT ROLE] in a contract dispute against [OPPOSING PARTY]. Dispute summary: [DISPUTE SUMMARY]. The issues I need discovery on: [KEY ISSUES]. The applicable rules cap interrogatories at [INTERROGATORY LIMIT], counting discrete subparts.
## Task
Draft a first set of interrogatories to [OPPOSING PARTY]. Cover: formation and negotiation of the contract, performance and breach, damages claimed or disputed, the affirmative defenses raised in the answer, persons with knowledge, and identification of key documents. Number each interrogatory. Stay under the limit, counting subparts.
## Standards
- Open with a short DEFINITIONS section. Define "identify," "document," "communication," and the contract at issue. Nothing else unless a question needs it.
- One fact subject per interrogatory. No compound questions that invite objections.
- Ask for facts, not legal conclusions. Contention interrogatories are allowed, but flag each one in a drafting comment so I can decide whether to serve it now or after document production.
- Plain declarative phrasing: "Identify each person who..." not "Please state whether or not..."
- Output: DEFINITIONS, then numbered INTERROGATORIES, then a short note telling me which questions are most likely to draw objections and why.
If you are missing a fact you need — contract date, breach theory, damages categories — ask me before drafting. Do not invent case details.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- The complaint and answer, or a tight summary of each claim and defense
- The contract and key amendments, or at least the disputed terms
- Your jurisdiction's interrogatory limit and its subpart-counting rule
- The two or three issues this case will turn on
- Remove client-identifying details, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting case material
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Count interrogatories including discrete subparts against the rule limit — AI miscounts subparts often
- Check the definitions against your jurisdiction's pattern; delete any defined term the set never uses
- Confirm each contention interrogatory is one you want answered now, not after depositions
- Strip any question that asks for a pure legal conclusion
- Verify party names, contract dates, and pleading paragraph references against the actual file
- Map the set against your case theory: every element you must prove gets at least one interrogatory
- Confirm the set complies with any local form requirements (line spacing for answers, certificate of service)
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
"INTERROGATORY NO. 4: Identify each person who participated in negotiating the March 2024 Supply Agreement between Meridian Supply Co. and Calloway Logistics LLC, and state each person's role in the negotiation.
INTERROGATORY NO. 7: State the date on which You contend Meridian Supply Co. first failed to perform under the Supply Agreement, and identify each document supporting that contention.
INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Itemize each category of damages You claim in this action, stating the amount claimed and the method of calculation for each category.
Drafting note: Nos. 7 and 12 are contention interrogatories. Expect a timing objection if served before substantial document production. No. 9 may count as two subparts under the local counting rule — the set sits at 21 against your limit of 25."
CUSTOMIZATION Swap the coverage list in Task for tort, employment, or construction issues — the structure holds. For state court, replace the limit and the subpart-counting note with your state rule (some states count subparts loosely, some strictly). If the answer has not been filed yet, drop the affirmative-defense questions and add them in a second set.
Case summary — single opinion
OPEN SAMPLE Turns the full text of one judicial opinion into a structured working summary: posture, facts, issues, holding, reasoning, dicta. Reach for it when you pulled a case and need to know in five minutes whether it helps you.
[JURISDICTION] ·[ISSUE YOU ARE RESEARCHING] ·[FULL TEXT OF OPINION]
## Context
You are a legal research assistant working for a litigation attorney in [JURISDICTION]. The attorney needs a working summary of one judicial opinion. The full text is pasted below. Work only from that text. Do not add outside cases, facts, or law.
## Task
Summarize the opinion. Produce these sections in order:
1. Caption — case name, court, date, and citation as given in the pasted text.
2. Procedural posture — how the case reached this court, two sentences or fewer.
3. Facts — only the facts the court relied on. Five sentences maximum.
4. Issues — each legal question the court decided, stated as a question.
5. Holding — the answer to each issue, one sentence each, with a pointer to where in the pasted text the court states it.
6. Reasoning — the steps the court took to each holding. Name the authorities the court leaned on hardest.
7. Disposition — affirmed, reversed, remanded, or other.
8. Dicta and limits — statements an attorney might be tempted to cite that are not the holding. Concurrences or dissents and what they would change.
9. Relevance — two sentences on how the opinion bears on this question: [ISSUE YOU ARE RESEARCHING].
## Standards
- Quote holding language exactly. Mark every direct quote with quotation marks and its location in the pasted text.
- Label dicta as dicta. Do not promote passing remarks to holdings.
- Plain English. No opinion on whether the decision is right.
- If the pasted text is incomplete, or the opinion never addresses [ISSUE YOU ARE RESEARCHING], say so. Do not fill gaps.
If anything you need is missing, ask before answering.
[FULL TEXT OF OPINION]
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Full text of the opinion from Westlaw, Lexis, or the official reporter — not a headnote, syllabus, or blog summary.
- The issue you are researching, stated in one sentence.
- Jurisdiction and court level, so you can weigh the summary's relevance.
- Confidentiality: the opinion is public, but strip your client notes, matter names, and work-product annotations before pasting. Confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance (see ABA Formal Op. 512 (2024)).
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Read the holding section against the opinion itself. Confirm every quoted phrase appears where the summary says it does, word for word.
- Confirm the summary added nothing: no facts, no authorities, no reasoning that is not in the pasted text. AI tools blend in remembered law from similar cases.
- Check the dicta labels. Would the issuing court treat the flagged language as binding? Misclassifying holding as dicta cuts both ways.
- Pull the case in Westlaw or Lexis and KeyCite or Shepardize it. Confirm it is still good law on your issue: not overruled, not superseded, no negative treatment.
- Verify every other case or statute the summary mentions. Each one must exist, say what the summary claims, and be current. Read it before you repeat it anywhere. Never cite authority you have not read — AI-invented citations are the leading malpractice risk with these tools.
- Confirm procedural posture and disposition against the opinion. AI tools transpose affirmed and reversed more often than you would expect.
- Confirm the citation format and reporter volume against the official source before the citation enters any draft.
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
Caption: Meridian Supply Co. v. Calloway Logistics, Inc. (fictional intermediate appellate opinion, 2024).
Procedural posture: Calloway appealed a judgment awarding Meridian lost-profit damages after a jury trial. The trial court had held the contract's consequential damages waiver unenforceable.
Issue: Does a consequential damages waiver survive when the contract's limited repair-or-replace remedy fails of its essential purpose?
Holding: Yes. "The failure of a limited remedy does not, by itself, invalidate a separately bargained waiver of consequential damages." (Section II.B of pasted text.) The waiver falls only if unconscionable.
Reasoning: The court read the two clauses as independent risk allocations between merchants. It relied most heavily on the comment to the pasted UCC provision and on its own prior decision quoted in Section II.A.
Disposition: Reversed and remanded for recalculation of damages.
Dicta and limits: The court noted a different result "might follow" for a consumer buyer. That is dicta — both parties here were merchants. One judge concurred separately to urge a case-by-case approach; that view did not carry.
Relevance: Supports enforcing your client's waiver even though the repair remedy failed, provided your buyer is a merchant and the waiver was separately negotiated.
CUSTOMIZATION Works on administrative decisions, arbitration awards, and trial court orders — swap the section list to match (an agency decision needs standard of review and deference posture). For appellate brief work, add a section pulling the standard of review the court applied. If you summarize many cases on one issue, run this per case, then feed the outputs to the line-of-cases synthesis prompt.
First-pass contract review — NDA
OPEN SAMPLE Issue-spots an NDA from your client's side: definition scope, exclusions, term, residuals, hidden riders, remedies. Use it to get a structured findings list before your own read, on the most common agreement that crosses a solo desk.
[CLIENT NAME] ·[DISCLOSING PARTY / RECEIVING PARTY / BOTH] ·[PURPOSE OF DISCLOSURE] ·[GOVERNING LAW] ·[NDA TEXT]
## Context
You are a contracts attorney's first-pass reviewer. The client is [CLIENT NAME], the [DISCLOSING PARTY / RECEIVING PARTY / BOTH] under the NDA pasted below. Purpose of the disclosure: [PURPOSE OF DISCLOSURE]. Review from the client's side only.
## Task
Issue-spot the NDA. Produce a numbered list of findings, most serious first. For each finding: the clause (quote the operative language), the problem for this client in one or two sentences, and a suggested fix in one sentence. Check at minimum:
- Definition of confidential information — too broad or too narrow for the client's role; marking requirements the client will not follow in practice.
- Term and survival — duration of obligations; whether trade secrets survive separately.
- Standard exclusions — independently developed, publicly available, rightfully received, already known. A missing exclusion is a finding.
- Permitted disclosures — legal compulsion, advisors, affiliates; notice-and-cooperation duties.
- Use restrictions versus disclosure restrictions — can the receiving party use the information beyond the stated purpose?
- Residuals clause — flag it loudly if the client is the discloser.
- Remedies — injunctive relief language, fee-shifting, any liability cap that guts the agreement.
- Return-or-destroy obligations and certification.
- Non-solicitation or non-compete riders hiding inside the NDA.
- Governing law, venue, and assignment.
Close with a three-sentence overall read: sign, negotiate, or rewrite.
## Standards
- Quote clause language. Do not paraphrase what a clause "probably means."
- Flag silence the same as bad language.
- No findings about clauses that do not exist in the pasted text.
- No statutory or case citations. If enforceability turns on state law, write "verify under [GOVERNING LAW]" and stop.
- This is a first pass for an attorney, not advice to the client.
If the client's role or the purpose is unclear from what I gave you, ask before reviewing.
[NDA TEXT]
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- The complete NDA text, including exhibits. A review of half the document is worse than none.
- Which side your client sits on, and the business purpose of the disclosure in one sentence.
- Confidentiality: replace party names with placeholders, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting client agreements (ABA Formal Op. 512 (2024) covers the duty).
- Any deal facts that change the stakes — active development in the same space, prior dealings, whether employees will be exposed to the information.
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Read the full NDA yourself. This output is a checklist for your read, not a replacement. Confirm every quoted clause appears in the document, verbatim and in the cited section.
- Confirm the findings match the client's side. Side-confusion is this prompt's most common failure — a residuals flag aimed at the wrong party inverts the advice.
- Check the silence findings: search the document yourself for each 'missing' exclusion or term before telling the client it is absent. AI misses clauses living in definitions or exhibits.
- Re-read sections the output did not flag. First-pass tools anchor on common clauses and skim bespoke ones, which is where the trap usually sits.
- If the output cites any statute, case, or regulation despite the instruction not to, verify it in Westlaw, Lexis, or the official code before repeating it: confirm it exists, says what the output claims, and is current. Never cite authority you have not read — AI invents citations.
- Confirm any enforceability flag (non-solicit duration, fee-shifting) against current law of the governing state before you advise — verified in a primary source, not from memory.
- Confirm the 'overall read' against your own judgment of the client's leverage and risk tolerance — the model does not know either.
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
Findings — Meridian Supply Co. as receiving party:
1. Definition of confidential information (Section 1). "Any information disclosed by Discloser, whether or not marked." No marking requirement, no specificity. Meridian cannot tell what is covered, so every conversation becomes a potential breach. Fix: limit to information marked confidential, or identified as confidential in writing within 30 days.
2. Missing exclusion — independent development (Section 2). The draft lists public-knowledge and rightful-receipt exclusions but omits independent development. Meridian's product team works in the same space; without it, parallel work looks like misuse. Fix: add the exclusion with a documentation requirement.
3. Term (Section 5). Obligations survive "in perpetuity." Perpetual duties on unmarked information are a compliance trap. Fix: three years from disclosure; trade secrets protected as long as they qualify under applicable law.
4. Non-solicitation rider (Section 8). A two-year employee non-solicit is buried in a confidentiality agreement and exceeds the stated purpose. Fix: strike it, or carve out general solicitations not targeted at Discloser's employees.
5. Venue (Section 11). Exclusive venue in Discloser's home county. Fix: client's state, or mutual.
Overall read: negotiate. The skeleton is standard, but findings 1 and 2 are unacceptable for a receiving party with an active development team. Findings 3 through 5 are trade material.
CUSTOMIZATION Set the side carefully — discloser and receiver reviews are near opposites, and a mutual NDA needs both lenses. For M&A diligence NDAs, add standstill, non-circumvention, and clean-team checks to the Task list. For employee-facing NDAs, add a check for whistleblower and trade-secret-notice carve-outs required in some jurisdictions, and verify those requirements under current law before relying on the flag.
Statute plain-language summary — from pasted text
OPEN SAMPLE Turns a pasted statute into a structured plain-language summary: elements, deadlines, penalties, cross-references, and undefined terms. Reach for it the first time you read an unfamiliar statute on a live matter.
[STATUTE CITATION] ·[JURISDICTION] ·[MATTER CONTEXT OR CLIENT QUESTION] ·[PASTE FULL STATUTE TEXT]
## Context
You are helping a solo attorney read a statute fast. I will paste the full statute text below. Work only from the pasted text. Do not pull statutory language, case law, or interpretations from memory. Do not cite any case, statute, or regulation I did not paste.
Statute citation: [STATUTE CITATION]
Jurisdiction: [JURISDICTION]
Why I am reading it: [MATTER CONTEXT OR CLIENT QUESTION]
Full text: [PASTE FULL STATUTE TEXT]
## Task
Produce a plain-language summary with these numbered sections:
1. One-sentence answer — what this statute does.
2. Who it covers and who it exempts, per the text.
3. Elements or requirements, numbered. For each, quote the exact statutory language, then restate it in plain words beside the quote.
4. Deadlines and time limits, with what starts each clock.
5. Penalties, remedies, and who can enforce.
6. Cross-references — every other section, statute, or regulation the text mentions, listed for me to pull separately.
7. Open questions — terms the statute uses but does not define, and any language that could read more than one way, marked "ambiguous; needs case law."
## Standards
- Quote the statute exactly wherever word choice could matter. Plain-language restatements sit next to quotes; they never replace them.
- Flag every defined term and point to where the definition lives, if the paste includes it.
- Take no position on how courts have read ambiguous language. You have no case law in front of you.
- If the pasted text looks incomplete, cut off, or internally inconsistent, say so and stop rather than summarize a fragment.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- The full current text of the statute, copied from Westlaw, Lexis, or the official code — not from a secondary site
- Confirmation you copied the version in force on the date that matters to your matter
- The definitions section if your statute relies on one — paste it too
- Your one-line reason for reading it, so the summary points at your question
- If the matter context identifies a client, generalize it, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance (see ABA Formal Op. 512)
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Compare every quoted phrase in the summary against your pasted text character for character — AI sometimes 'corrects' statutory language silently
- Confirm in Westlaw, Lexis, or the official code that you pasted the current version: check effective dates, pending amendments, and session laws. A summary of a superseded version is worse than no summary
- Pull and read every cross-reference in section 6 yourself before relying on the summary's account of the main statute — exemptions often hide there
- Treat section 7's ambiguity flags as a research list: run the disputed terms through case law in Westlaw or Lexis. Never act on the AI's plain-language gloss of an ambiguous term
- If the output cites anything you did not paste, strike it — then verify your suspicion that it was invented. Never use a citation you have not read in the reporter or code itself
- Check the deadline section against the text twice; off-by-one readings of 'within' and 'after' clauses are a known AI failure
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs (a pasted state residential security-deposit statute):
1. One-sentence answer. This statute gives a landlord 30 days after the tenancy ends to return a residential security deposit or send an itemized list of deductions, and makes a landlord who misses the deadline liable for double the deposit plus attorney's fees.
3. Elements — landlord's return duty.
(a) Tenancy ends. Text: "upon termination of the tenancy." Plain restatement: the clock starts when the tenancy ends, not when keys come back. "Termination" is not defined here — see section 7.
(b) Thirty days. Text: "within thirty days thereafter." Plain restatement: day one is the day after termination; the duty must be complete by day 30.
(c) Return or itemize. Text: "return the deposit or deliver a written, itemized statement of deductions." Plain restatement: the landlord picks one; partial return requires the itemized statement for the rest.
6. Cross-references to pull separately: § 44-7-2 (definitions); § 44-7-34(b) (exemption for owner-occupied buildings of four or fewer units); § 44-7-49 (court costs).
7. Open questions: "normal wear and tear" is used but not defined. "Deliver" could mean mail or receipt — ambiguous; needs case law.
CUSTOMIZATION Works for any code section — swap the section list for criminal statutes (elements, mental state, grading, defenses) or tax provisions (triggering event, computation, exceptions). For multi-section schemes, run it once per section, then ask for a combined map. Add your state's effective-date conventions to Standards if your legislature uses delayed effective dates.
Master chronology — first build from a document set
OPEN SAMPLE Builds a date-ordered case chronology from a stack of document excerpts or summaries. Reach for it at the start of discovery or before drafting a statement of facts.
[CASE NAME] ·[CLAIMS AND DEFENSES] ·[KEY PLAYERS] ·[DATE RANGE] ·[DOCUMENT EXCERPTS OR SUMMARIES]
## Context
You are a litigation paralegal building a master chronology in [CASE NAME]. The claims and defenses: [CLAIMS AND DEFENSES]. Key players: [KEY PLAYERS]. The relevant period runs [DATE RANGE]. I will paste document excerpts or summaries below, each tagged with a Bates number or exhibit reference.
## Task
Build a chronology table with these columns: Date | Event | Source (Bates or exhibit no.) | Players involved | Why it matters to the claims or defenses.
## Standards
- One row per event. Sort by date, earliest first.
- Use exact dates from the documents. If a document gives only a month or an approximate date, write it as stated and add "(approx.)".
- Every row cites at least one source document. No row without a cite.
- Describe events in neutral terms. No characterizations of intent and no legal conclusions in the Event column. Argument-relevant notes go only in the last column, marked "Possible significance:".
- If two documents conflict on a date or fact, put both versions in one row and flag it "CONFLICT".
- Do not infer events no document supports. If a gap looks important, list it under a final heading "Gaps and missing periods".
- Plain English. No adjectives like "damning" or "smoking-gun".
Documents:
[DOCUMENT EXCERPTS OR SUMMARIES]
If any document lacks a date or a Bates reference, ask me before placing it rather than guessing.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Remove client-identifying details, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting case documents (ABA Formal Op. 512)
- Document excerpts or summaries, each tagged with its Bates number or exhibit reference
- One-paragraph statement of the claims and defenses
- List of key players with roles
- The relevant date range
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Spot-check every date against its source document; transposed dates are the most common error
- Confirm each cited Bates number exists and matches the document described
- Check that no row describes an event absent from the pasted documents
- Confirm rows flagged CONFLICT reflect a real discrepancy, not two descriptions of the same event
- Read the "Possible significance" notes as suggestions, not analysis you adopt without thought
- Check the gaps list against your own knowledge of the production; the AI sees only what you pasted
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
(Meridian Supply Co. v. Harlan Fabrication LLC — breach of supply agreement)
| Date | Event | Source | Players | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-15 | Parties sign Supply Agreement; 24-month term, 5,000-unit monthly minimum | MER-000112 | Whitfield (Meridian), Okafor (Harlan) | Sets the minimum-quantity term at issue |
| 2024-06-03 | Okafor emails Whitfield: April shipment "short by roughly 1,200 units" due to "press downtime" | MER-000487 | Okafor, Whitfield | Possible significance: first written notice of shortfall; states a cause |
| 2024-06-20 (approx.) | Internal Harlan memo cites "ongoing capacity issue since spring" | HAR-002201 | Reyes, Okafor | Possible significance: internal knowledge before the June 3 assurances |
| 2024-07-08 | CONFLICT — Meridian letter states cure deadline of July 1 (MER-000530); Harlan reply states July 15 (HAR-002340) | MER-000530; HAR-002340 | Whitfield, Okafor | Cure-period dispute bears on the termination claim |
Gaps and missing periods: no documents between 2024-02-01 and 2024-05-30 despite monthly shipments due under § 3.2.
CUSTOMIZATION Add columns the matter needs — a Damages column for commercial disputes, a Treatment column for injury cases. For document-heavy matters, run the prompt in batches of 20-30 documents and combine results with the chronology-merge prompt in this section. Match the date format to your jurisdiction's filing conventions before the chronology feeds a brief.
Confidential mediation statement — first draft
OPEN SAMPLE Drafts a confidential mediation statement for the mediator's eyes only. Use it two to three weeks out, once you have the damages numbers and the negotiation history in hand.
[CASE CAPTION AND COURT] ·[CLIENT AND POSITION] ·[MEDIATOR NAME AND BACKGROUND, IF KNOWN] ·[TWO-PARAGRAPH DISPUTE SUMMARY] ·[POSTURE — MOTIONS PENDING, DISCOVERY STATUS, TRIAL DATE] ·[STRENGTHS] ·[WEAKNESSES AND BAD FACTS] ·[DAMAGES BREAKDOWN WITH NUMBERS] ·[PRIOR DEMANDS AND OFFERS] ·[TARGET RANGE AND MUST-HAVE TERMS]
## Context
You are a litigation drafting assistant for a solo attorney. Draft a confidential mediation statement for the mediator only — the other side will not see it. Case: [CASE CAPTION AND COURT]. Client: [CLIENT AND POSITION]. Mediator: [MEDIATOR NAME AND BACKGROUND, IF KNOWN]. Dispute summary: [TWO-PARAGRAPH DISPUTE SUMMARY]. Procedural posture: [POSTURE — MOTIONS PENDING, DISCOVERY STATUS, TRIAL DATE]. Liability strengths: [STRENGTHS]. Weaknesses and bad facts: [WEAKNESSES AND BAD FACTS]. Damages: [DAMAGES BREAKDOWN WITH NUMBERS]. Settlement history: [PRIOR DEMANDS AND OFFERS]. Goal: [TARGET RANGE AND MUST-HAVE TERMS].
## Task
Draft the statement, five to eight pages of content, in this order: introduction and what the client wants from mediation; factual background told as a clear story; procedural posture; liability analysis that addresses our weaknesses head-on instead of hiding them; damages with a simple table; settlement history and why talks stalled; obstacles to settlement and how the mediator can help; conclusion with our realistic range.
## Standards
- Candid tone. This document persuades the mediator we are reasonable, not that we are invincible. Concede what the record makes us concede.
- No case citations unless I supply them. Where law matters, write [CITE] and describe the point so I can add verified authority.
- Plain sentences. No adjectives doing the work facts should do.
- Label the settlement-range section CONFIDENTIAL — MEDIATOR'S EYES ONLY.
- Flag every factual statement you cannot trace to my inputs as [CONFIRM].
If a required input is missing, list what you need and stop. Do not draft around gaps.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Two-paragraph dispute summary and the procedural posture
- An honest list of strengths and weaknesses — the statement fails if you feed it only strengths
- Damages numbers with backup (medicals, lost profits, contract amounts)
- Full demand-and-offer history with dates
- The mediator's requirements: page limit, due date, and whether statements are confidential or exchanged
- Remove client-identifying details, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting case facts (ABA Formal Op. 512)
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Confirm whether your mediation order calls for an exchanged statement, a confidential one, or both — this draft assumes confidential, and an exchanged version needs the weaknesses and range sections rewritten or removed
- Trace every factual assertion to the record; resolve every [CONFIRM] flag
- Recompute the damages table yourself — AI arithmetic errors in damages tables are common
- Verify the demand-and-offer numbers and dates against your file; one wrong prior-offer figure costs you credibility with the mediator
- Replace every [CITE] with authority verified in Westlaw, Lexis, or an official reporter — never send AI-suggested citations unchecked
- Read the weaknesses section as the mediator will: does it concede enough to be credible without conceding liability?
- Confirm nothing in the statement admits facts you would dispute at trial — mediation confidentiality and Rule 408 protection have limits that vary by state
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs (Pell Family Dental v. Meridian Supply Co., defective autoclave, plaintiff side):
III. Liability
Meridian will say Dr. Pell's staff ignored the maintenance schedule. The argument has surface appeal, and we address it directly. The service log shows two missed monthly checks in 2024. [CONFIRM: log produced as Ex. 9.] But Meridian's own technician inspected the unit in January 2025 and certified it serviceable — six weeks before the chamber failure. The missed checks cannot explain a sealed-component failure that Meridian's manual says only factory service can reach.
IV. Damages
Equipment replacement: $41,200 (invoice attached)
Practice interruption, 11 days: $38,940 (production reports, 2024 daily average)
Repair attempts: $6,150
Total: $86,290
VII. Obstacles to Settlement
The parties value the maintenance defense differently, and Meridian's last offer predates the technician's deposition. The mediator can help by testing Meridian's read of that testimony in caucus.
CONFIDENTIAL — MEDIATOR'S EYES ONLY
Dr. Pell will accept $70,000 paid within 30 days. The number reflects real trial risk on the maintenance defense, which we estimate cuts our verdict expectation by roughly 20 percent.
CUSTOMIZATION For court-annexed mediation, check the local rule first — some districts cap statements at five pages and bar exhibits. Defense-side drafts should expand the obstacles section to cover insurance authority and approval timing. In employment and family matters, add a non-monetary terms section (references, confidentiality, parenting logistics) — those terms often unlock the deal.
Billing narrative cleanup — vague entries to compliant descriptions
OPEN SAMPLE Rewrites vague time entries ("attention to file," "review documents") into specific, defensible billing narratives without inflating the work. Use it on draft entries before they reach the pre-bill.
[MATTER TYPE] ·[BILLING GUIDELINES OR "NONE"] ·[RAW TIME ENTRIES]
## Context
You are a billing editor for a solo law practice. The time entries below were written in a hurry. Vague narratives draw client pushback, e-billing rejections, and reductions in fee petitions. Your job is to make each narrative specific enough to justify the time — describing only work the original entry supports.
Matter type: [MATTER TYPE]
Client billing guidelines, if any: [BILLING GUIDELINES OR "NONE"]
Raw entries (date, hours, narrative): [RAW TIME ENTRIES]
## Task
Rewrite each narrative. Output a table: Date | Hours | Original | Revised | Attorney input needed.
## Standards
- Start each revised narrative with a past-tense action verb: drafted, reviewed, revised, conferred, analyzed, prepared.
- Name the document, issue, or party where the original supports it. Where it does not, insert a bracketed placeholder — [WHICH AGREEMENT?], [WHO ATTENDED?] — and repeat the placeholder in the Attorney input needed column.
- Never invent specifics. A narrative that claims work not performed is a fraudulent bill, not a clean one.
- Do not change any hours value. Do not merge or split entries.
- One entry, one description of the actual task. Cut filler verbs ("attend to," "work on," "handle").
- Keep narratives factual about the task, not strategy. Assume the client, an auditor, or a fee-petition judge will read every line.
- No abbreviations a client would not recognize.
If an original entry is so bare you cannot tell what the task was, do not guess — put the whole entry in the Attorney input needed column and move on.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Raw time entries with date, hours, and narrative for one matter or one billing period
- The client's billing guidelines or e-billing rules, if any apply
- Your calendar and sent email for the period, to resolve placeholders afterward
- Confidentiality: remove client-identifying details, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting client data (ABA Formal Op. 512 (2024))
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Every revised narrative describes only work you performed — read each one and confirm from memory or records, line by line
- All bracketed placeholders resolved with real details before the bill goes out; a placeholder on an invoice is worse than a vague entry
- Hours values identical to the originals — diff the columns
- No narrative discloses privileged strategy or work-product detail that could surface in a fee petition or audit
- Entry count in equals entry count out — nothing merged, split, or dropped
- Verbs match the task: 'drafted' for new text, 'revised' for edits — a judge reading 'drafted' six times for one document notices
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
| Date | Hours | Original | Revised | Attorney input needed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6/9 | 1.5 | review documents | Reviewed Calloway Freight's responses to first set of interrogatories and noted deficiencies in responses 4, 7, and 11 [CONFIRM: which responses were deficient?] | Confirm deficient response numbers |
| 6/9 | 0.3 | call w client | Conferred with client by telephone about [TOPIC?] | Topic of call |
| 6/10 | 2.1 | work on motion | Drafted motion to compel discovery responses, including statement of facts and good-faith conference certification | None, if this matches the work |
| 6/11 | 0.2 | attention to file | — | Entry too bare to rewrite. What was the task? |
Note: hours unchanged. Three entries need your input before billing.
CUSTOMIZATION For insurance defense, add the carrier's task-code and staffing rules to [BILLING GUIDELINES] — the rewrite will then track UTBMS phrasing. Flat-fee practices can use this on internal time records to track matter profitability instead of invoicing. For fee-shifting cases, tighten the standard: narratives must survive a lodestar challenge, so resolve every placeholder against contemporaneous records.
Deadline extraction — scheduling order to calendar table
OPEN SAMPLE Pulls every date, deadline, and undated obligation out of a scheduling order into a calendaring table. First pass only — every date gets verified against the order before it touches your calendar.
[JURISDICTION] ·[CASE_NAME_OR_MATTER_ID] ·[SCHEDULING_ORDER_TEXT] ·[REMINDER_LEAD_TIMES]
## Context
You are a litigation calendaring assistant for a solo attorney in [JURISDICTION]. Below is the text of a scheduling order in [CASE_NAME_OR_MATTER_ID]. Identifying details may be redacted.
Order text:
[SCHEDULING_ORDER_TEXT]
## Task
Extract every date and deadline into a table with these columns:
1. Date, exactly as stated in the order
2. Event or deadline
3. Exact quote from the order
4. Type — fixed date, or relative ("30 days before trial")
5. Suggested reminder dates at [REMINDER_LEAD_TIMES]
After the table, list separately:
- Relative deadlines the order defines but does not date. Do not compute these dates. State the formula and the trigger event.
- Obligations without dates: meet-and-confer duties, page limits, pretrial filing requirements, incorporated standing orders.
## Standards
- Extraction only. Never calculate a date the order does not state. Date arithmetic depends on counting rules, weekends, and court holidays you cannot verify.
- Quote the order exactly in column 3. No paraphrase.
- If two provisions conflict, flag both. Do not pick one.
- Flag any deadline that local rules commonly modify, with a note to check local rules and the judge's standing order.
- If the order text is cut off or a date is unreadable, ask. Do not fill gaps.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- The full text of the scheduling order, including footnotes and any incorporated standing order
- Your reminder lead times — for example 30, 14, and 3 days
- The applicable time-computation rule (FRCP 6 or your state equivalent) at hand for the verification pass
- Confidentiality: redact the caption and party names, or confirm your AI tool sits under your firm's confidentiality and bar guidance before pasting case documents (see ABA Formal Op. 512)
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Read the order line by line against the table. Every date matches. Every deadline in the order appears in the table. A missed deadline here is a malpractice claim, not a typo.
- Confirm the AI computed no dates. Compute every relative deadline yourself under the applicable counting rule, including weekends and court holidays.
- Check the judge's standing order and local rules for modifications the scheduling order assumes
- Resolve any flagged conflicts between provisions — by motion or a call to the clerk if needed
- Enter the dates into your calendaring system yourself; have a second person, or a second pass a day later, check the entries against the order
- Give the undated obligations (meet and confer, pretrial filings) their own calendar entries with self-set dates
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs:
Meridian Supply Co. v. Calloway Freight, LLC — extraction from scheduling order dated May 12, 2026.
| Date | Event | Order language | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 14, 2026 | Amend pleadings / add parties | "Motions to amend the pleadings or add parties shall be filed by August 14, 2026." | Fixed |
| Oct 15, 2026 | Fact discovery closes | "All fact discovery shall be completed by October 15, 2026." | Fixed |
| Nov 6, 2026 | Plaintiff expert disclosures | "Plaintiff shall serve expert disclosures by November 6, 2026." | Fixed |
Relative deadlines — NOT computed; verify under the applicable counting rules:
- Dispositive motions: "no later than 45 days after the close of fact discovery." Trigger: Oct 15, 2026 fact discovery close.
- Daubert motions: "filed with dispositive motions." Trigger: dispositive motion deadline.
Obligations without dates:
- "Counsel shall meet and confer before filing any discovery motion." No date — calendar a standing reminder.
- Pretrial submissions governed by the court's standing order, incorporated by reference. Obtain and review the standing order; it is not in this text.
CUSTOMIZATION Works the same for state court case management orders and arbitration scheduling orders — adjust [JURISDICTION] and have the right counting rule at hand. Add a column mapped to your calendaring software's import fields if you bulk-enter dates. When the court amends the order, rerun the extraction on the amended text and compare it against your existing calendar line by line; amended orders are where deadlines get dropped.
Practice-area page rewrite — strip legalese and puffery
OPEN SAMPLE Rewrites an existing practice-area web page into plain English a prospective client can follow. Reach for it when your current page reads like a brief or a brochure.
[PRACTICE AREA] ·[FIRM NAME] ·[SOLO/SMALL FIRM] ·[CITY, STATE] ·[CONSULTATION DETAILS] ·[EXISTING PAGE COPY] ·[FIRM FACTS]
## Context
You are a legal marketing copywriter who writes plain English for law firm websites. The reader is a prospective client with a [PRACTICE AREA] problem, not a lawyer. They skim. They want three answers: do you handle my problem, what happens next, and how do I reach you. The firm: [FIRM NAME], a [SOLO/SMALL FIRM] in [CITY, STATE]. The existing page copy is pasted below.
## Task
Rewrite the page. Keep every factual claim that survives scrutiny. Cut the rest. Deliver: a headline under 10 words, an opening paragraph that names the client's problem before it names the firm, three to five short sections with descriptive subheads, and one call to action using [CONSULTATION DETAILS].
## Standards
- Reading level: 8th grade. Sentences under 20 words.
- Strip legalese: "pursuant to," "aforementioned," "in the event that," "utilize."
- Strip puffery: "aggressive," "premier," "unparalleled," "fight for you." State what the firm does instead.
- No outcome guarantees and no superlatives. Bar advertising rules treat both as misleading.
- Do not invent results, years of experience, or credentials. Use only what the source copy or [FIRM FACTS] provides.
- Second person for the client, first person plural for the firm.
- 300-500 words total.
[EXISTING PAGE COPY]
[FIRM FACTS — credentials, years, fees, and claims the attorney can document]
If any required input is missing, or a claim in the source copy cannot be verified from what I gave you, ask before writing. Do not fill gaps with plausible details.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- Current page copy, pasted in full
- Verified firm facts: bar admissions, years in practice, credentials you can document
- Consultation terms: free, flat fee, or phone screen
- Your state's attorney advertising rules — some states require disclaimers or filing
- Confirm no client names or matter details sit in the source copy without written client consent
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- Every factual claim traces to your input — search the draft for numbers, years, and credentials you did not supply
- No outcome guarantees, and no "specialist" or "expert" claim unless you hold a certification your state recognizes (Model Rule 7.2(c))
- Required state disclaimers present — "attorney advertising," past-results language, or filing requirements per your bar
- Headline and first paragraph name the client's problem, not the firm
- Read it aloud — anything you would not say to a client across a desk gets cut
- Fees or consultation terms stated are ones you honor today
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs (fictional firm Whitfield Law, estate planning page, Dayton, Ohio):
**An estate plan you can finish in two meetings.**
You know you need a will. You have put it off because it sounds expensive, complicated, and grim. Most of our clients waited years before calling. Then they finished the whole thing in two meetings.
**What we prepare**
Wills, revocable living trusts, financial powers of attorney, and health care directives. We quote a flat fee before we start. No hourly surprises.
**What happens first**
Call or use the form below. We send a short worksheet — your family, your property, your wishes. The first meeting takes about an hour. At the second, you sign.
**What it costs**
Flat fees start at $850 for a will package and $2,400 for a trust package. Your quote depends on your situation, and you get it in writing before any work begins.
**Why Whitfield Law**
Dana Whitfield has prepared estate plans for Dayton families since 2014. She is licensed in Ohio and teaches an annual estate planning seminar at the county library.
**Ready when you are.** Call (937) 555-0142 or request your worksheet below. The first call is free.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
CUSTOMIZATION Works for any consumer practice area as written. For business or institutional clients, raise the reading level a notch and replace the consultation framing with a scoping call. States differ on advertising review — Texas and Florida require filing or pre-approval for some materials, so add your state's requirement to the Standards section. Contingency practices should hard-code the state's required fee disclaimer as a fixed closing line.
Client alert — new case, statute, or rule
OPEN SAMPLE Drafts a client alert email from a legal development you supply and have verified. Use it when a new case, statute, or rule affects your client base and you want the alert out this week.
[FIRM NAME] ·[PRACTICE AREA] ·[AUDIENCE] ·[DEVELOPMENT] ·[EFFECTIVE DATE] ·[CITATION] ·[DEADLINE WINDOW] ·[FOOTER] ·[SOURCE MATERIAL]
## Context
You are drafting a client alert for [FIRM NAME], a [PRACTICE AREA] firm. The audience: [AUDIENCE — e.g., current and former business clients, HR contacts]. A legal development affects them: [DEVELOPMENT — name the case, statute, or rule]. The source material is pasted below — the attorney's own summary, the official text, or both. Work only from what is pasted. Do not add legal analysis from your own knowledge; your training data may be wrong or stale.
## Task
Draft an email alert of 250-400 words. Structure: a subject line under 60 characters, a one-sentence summary of what changed, who it affects, what it requires and when ([EFFECTIVE DATE]), two to four concrete action items, and an invitation to call with questions.
## Standards
- Plain English. A non-lawyer client must follow it on one read.
- Every legal statement must trace to the pasted source material. If the source does not cover a point, write [VERIFY] in its place instead of the claim.
- No advice on any specific client's facts. Frame action items as general steps.
- Cite the authority once, by name and citation exactly as given in [CITATION]. Do not generate citations.
- Tone: informative, not alarmist. No urgency language unless the deadline falls within [DEADLINE WINDOW].
- Close with the firm's standard footer: [FOOTER — disclaimer and unsubscribe].
[SOURCE MATERIAL]
[CITATION]
[EFFECTIVE DATE]
If the source material does not support a complete alert, list what is missing and stop. Do not fill gaps.
BEFORE YOU RUN IT
- The development's official text or your own written summary — pasted, not described
- The citation, copied from Westlaw, Lexis, or the official source
- Effective date and who is covered
- Your alert footer: disclaimer plus unsubscribe
- Confirm the source material contains no client information; if your summary grew out of client work, generalize it first
VERIFY BEFORE IT LEAVES YOUR HANDS
- The citation matches the official source — check Westlaw, Lexis, or the official reporter, not the draft (ABA Formal Opinion 512 treats unverified AI output as a competence problem)
- Effective dates, thresholds, and coverage match the statute or rule text
- No [VERIFY] flags remain in the draft
- Action items read as general steps — nothing creates advice to a specific client without an engagement
- Disclaimer and unsubscribe footer present; CAN-SPAM applies to commercial email
- No client matter referenced, even anonymized, without written consent
- Subject line is accurate, not clickbait
Sample output
Sample output — AI-generated from sample inputs (fictional statute summary supplied as source material):
**Subject: New Ohio LLC filing requirement starts March 1**
Ohio now requires every LLC to file a statement of continued existence every two years. The requirement comes from amendments to the Ohio Revised LLC Act, effective March 1 (citation as supplied in source material).
**Who this affects:** Every Ohio LLC, including single-member companies, and foreign LLCs registered in Ohio.
**What to do now:**
1. Confirm your registered agent address is current with the Secretary of State.
2. Calendar your filing window — it falls in your formation anniversary month.
3. If you manage several entities, build one list now. The late penalty in the source material is $250 per entity.
We can handle the filings for a flat fee of $95 per entity. Reply to this email or call the office with questions.
This alert is general information, not legal advice about your situation. [Footer with disclaimer and unsubscribe per firm template.]
CUSTOMIZATION Tune the audience line hard — an alert to HR managers reads differently from one to general counsel. Regulatory practices can add a [COMMENT DEADLINE] variable for rulemaking alerts. If you send through an email platform, paste your template's footer into [FOOTER] so the disclaimer survives formatting. For court decisions, supply the holding in your own words — never let the AI characterize a case it has not read.