138 prompts built for attorneys, covering jurisdiction-agnostic prompts for US practice. Every prompt ships with anti-hallucination safeguards and works with Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini.
Drafts a commercial agreement from the term sheet you paste, with every price, term and cap taken from your words, and a redline list against the other side's draft if you paste one. Terms nobody supplied stay blank for you.
Drafts a balanced mutual NDA in plain modern English from the terms you paste. Each clause is tested for one-sidedness, and any term you did not supply, such as a period or a carve-out, stays a blank for you.
Reviews a contract from your client's side. Every issue quotes its clause and number, tiers follow your client's stated goals, and the redline list never adds a burden for your client or a right for the other side.
Reviews a set of related agreements together and reports conflicts, gaps, definition mismatches and broken cross-references, each with quotes and clause numbers. Which document controls is read only from the precedence clauses you paste.
Drop in a case name and get a tight 6-section brief — citation, facts, issues, holding, reasoning, and subsequent treatment.
Two heavy-research prompts in one: an Am Law 100 research memorandum and a section-by-section statute and regulation breakdown with compliance obligations.
Compare statutes across three jurisdictions in a side-by-side table covering citations, definitions, deadlines, penalties, and the strategic differences that matter.
Drafts a pre-litigation demand letter or an intellectual property cease-and-desist letter from the facts, documents and governing text you paste. The relief and response date are yours; no law, damages theory or deadline is added from memory.
Turns an appellate decision you paste into an IRAC-style research memo in which every statement carries a page or paragraph marker. The holding is quoted, dicta only where the court marks it, and later history is left to your citator.
Builds a motion outline on the authorities and record cites you paste. Each argument point lists your authorities ranked by how directly their pasted text supports it, and no case is supplied from memory.
Turns a contract clause you paste into a short plain-English client letter. It covers only what the clause says and how it touches the facts you supply, and the next steps are yours, not the model's.
Drafts one clause in three versions labelled by whom each favors, using only the purpose, terms and example language you paste. Missing terms stay blank for you to complete; no version borrows a figure or claims what a court would enforce.
Two client-comm prompts in one: a sophisticated 1-2 page advisory letter and a sub-500 word case status email with bulleted action items.
A polished 250-350 word post-consultation email that thanks the prospect, summarizes issues, and presents next steps and fees.
Send a clear, well-calibrated case status email — tone, depth, and urgency tuned to your specific client and matter posture.
Deliver bad news to a client without sounding defensive — clear narrative, options, recommendation, and an offer to discuss live.
Draft a partner-ready internal legal memo using IRAC — facts, issue, rule, application, and a confidence-rated conclusion with recommended next steps.
Build a side-by-side jurisdiction comparison covering statutes, elements, trends, and strategic forum-selection considerations.
Reads a fact pattern and lists possible claims and defenses as questions to research, each tied to quoted facts and marked for authority. It states no elements and rates nothing.
Assesses a pending motion argument by argument from the briefs, record excerpts and authorities you paste. Each cited case is checked against pasted text, and probabilities and values appear only as you supply them.
Drafts a plain-language memo to the client on a settlement offer from the offer text, your fee terms and your own assessment. Net amounts are recomputed from supplied deductions, and the recommendation is yours, copied word for word.
Builds a topic-organized deposition outline for one witness from the exhibits and prior statements you paste. The questions are marker-free and tied to the documents; contradictions between the witness's own statements are set out quoted for you, not argued.
Outlines a motion to compel from the discovery requests, the responses and objections, and the meet-and-confer letters you paste. Legal standards appear only as the rule text you paste, and nothing is stated about the meet-and-confer that the correspondence does not show.
Drafts interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission as one coordinated set from the topics, record facts and rule text you paste. Numerical limits come only from the rule text, and no request asserts a fact your record does not support.
Drafts a short, warm client status email that leads with the most important update, uses only developments your documents support, and leaves every timeline and date you did not supply for you to complete.
Generate a complete 6 to 10 page pro-buyer Letter of Intent with earnout structure, exclusivity, MAC clause, and automatic flagging of any clause deviating from market standard.
Strategic landscape analysis prompt that surfaces dominant assignees, claim-type trends, white-space gaps, and verified patent citations for a target tech.
Lock in system-level anti-hallucination rules so the AI flags uncertainty about legal standards, precedents, or market practice rather than fabricating plausible-sounding answers.
Generate a pro-buyer SPA indemnification section with caps, baskets, survival periods, and clause-by-clause annotations flagging market-standard vs aggressive positions.
Scan data room contracts and produce a structured red flag report with risk-scored matrix, executive summary, missing document list, and recommended seller follow-ups.
Auto-generate SPA disclosure schedules from a data room index with source-document citations, gap flags, and seller-to-confirm tags in a structured table format.
Generate an H-1B employer support letter that maps job duties to the four specialty occupation criteria and avoids fabricated AAO/OOH citations.
Convert a raw USCIS RFE into a structured response: issue list, controlling standards, record evidence, new exhibits, executive summary, and evidence index.
Use Claude to score an O-1A candidate against all eight regulatory criteria, recommend the lead 3-5 criteria, and identify documentation gaps.
A trademark clearance prompt that runs identical, phonetic, visual, and conceptual searches plus a DuPont-factor likelihood-of-confusion verdict.
A patent search prompt that forces the AI to flag every cited reference as VERIFIED or UNVERIFIED and stop fabricating claim quotes.
Produces a freedom-to-operate report skeleton with claim-element mapping, infringement risk ratings, defenses, and design-around suggestions.
Generates a full exclusive patent license agreement with the Interest Toggle set to pro-licensor — audit rights, reversion triggers, and grant-back included.
Turns pasted medical records into a dated, source-quoted treatment chronology with recomputed visit counts and durations, treatment gaps listed without invented explanations, and conflicts between records shown, never resolved.
Drafts a warm, jargon-free welcome letter that explains the process, restates your fee terms exactly as pasted, lists what you need from the client and gives your own do and do-not guidance, leaving anything you did not supply for you to complete.
Audits pasted medical billing records into a date-sorted itemization with provider subtotals, totals recomputed before any stated total is read, duplicates and pre-incident charges excluded with the subtraction shown, and unsupported charges flagged.
Builds a phone-ready intake screening form for a new PI inquiry: liability and damages questions, red-flag prompts, document requests, evidence-preservation steps and a scoring grid with your threshold applied exactly, and every limitation date left for you to verify.
Drafts numbered interrogatories to a personal injury defendant, each tied to its source and the element it serves, sized against the numerical limit only if you paste the governing rule, with limits, timing and format left for you to confirm.
Builds an internal deposition preparation plan from the record you paste (topic map, record-based risk areas, prior history, social media and surveillance exposure) and a plain-language guide for the client that coaches process, never answers.
Builds a deposition outline for the defense medical examiner from the IME report, treating records and CV you paste. Questions are tied to exhibits and sources, and the questions to be asked aloud are separated from attorney-only strategy notes.
Builds a defendant driver deposition outline in XML-structured form from the police report, statements and records you paste. Impeachment points quote their source, no prior testimony is invented, and the questions to be asked aloud are kept clean.
Compares an insurer's offer with your demand and with the trial scenarios you supply. It recomputes net-to-client under your fee terms, costs and liens, uses only your probabilities and values, and lists the decision points for you and the client.
Builds the damages section of a PI demand letter from the bills, wage documents and future-care support you paste. Totals are recomputed, undocumented items are excluded, and non-economic damages use only the method and figures you supply.
Reviews the medical records you paste and extracts every statement that bears on causation, quoted with date and page, in the categories that matter: provider opinions, recorded patient history, timing, prior history, aggravation and adverse language. It gives no medical opinion.
Draft personal injury requests for production to the defendant from your own case facts, with definitions, protective-order flags and a count check against the rules you paste.
Generate a full personal injury demand letter with recomputed itemized damages, using only the valuation method, demand and response date you supply.
Draft a soft tissue demand letter answering minor-damage, treatment-gap and prior-condition objections from the records, with the aggravation rule taken only from text you paste.
Run an internal personal injury valuation that recomputes economic damages and builds scenarios only from the comparables, ranges and rule text you supply.
Generate a 40-60 item due diligence checklist organized by category, with red flags and post-2024 regulatory items like CTA beneficial ownership reporting.
Turn a title commitment into a structured exception report with HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW risk levels, action items, and missing endorsements for the property type.
Produce a deadline-driven closing checklist plus an automated cross-check of purchase price, legal description, and party names across every closing document.
Reads the example clauses you paste, draws out their structure, defined-term habits and tone, and drafts a SaaS indemnification clause in that style. Every substantive term comes from your instructions, never from the examples.
Reviews a software license from the licensee's side and returns the top risks you choose, each with the clause number and quoted words, a plain-English reading, and a proposed revision limited to what your client's positions and the contract already support.
Turns a pasted contract and your client's positions into a prioritized redline list: each item names the clause, quotes the words to delete and gives the words to insert, using only language your inputs support. Reasoning stays in a separate attorney-only part.
Reviews a pasted contract for your client, quotes the clause behind each risk, ranks it against the priorities you state, and lists redline changes tested so none adds a burden for the client.
Standing instructions that make Claude review each contract you paste for one named party: a 14-topic checklist, tiers set by your stated priorities, and redlines that never add a burden for your side.
Converts a dense indemnification analysis into a 300-word plain-English email for a non-lawyer CEO, ending with three decision questions for the client to consider.
A reference summary of the five core principles of legal prompt engineering — role, jurisdiction, context, structured output, anti-hallucination — proven across 200+ tests.
Definition entry explaining what legal prompt engineering is, why lawyers need it, and how it differs from generic prompting (jurisdictional accuracy, citation control, ethics).
Convert dense legal analysis into a clear, client-friendly explanation while preserving accuracy — minimal hallucination risk.
Paste the actual statutory text and get a plain-language breakdown of requirements, applicability, exceptions, penalties, and ambiguities.
Get a jurisdiction-specific research roadmap for any legal doctrine — frameworks, statutes, and regulators, no risky case citations.
Turn a framed legal issue into Boolean searches, statutory leads, alternative theories, and judicial vocabulary for Westlaw and Lexis.
Introduction to the prompt patterns that consistently produce reliable AI output for legal research and keep models inside the safe zone.
Drop in two versions of any document and get a clean comparison table — substantive changes, who they favor, risk levels, and ready-to-send counter-proposals.
One reusable template for first drafts of any legal document — feed in document type, practice area, brief facts, client type, and jurisdiction.
Configure Claude as a research assistant with confidence tagging, citation-fabrication bans, IRAC output, and a built-in verification checklist for every claim.
Configure Claude as a legal communication specialist that switches tone and structure across five recipient profiles, with built-in formatting and ethics guardrails.
A meta-guide on the four most common Claude system prompt pitfalls for law firms — bloat, contradictions, over-constraining, ignoring model updates — plus versioning advice.
Reusable demand letter scaffold with placeholder variables — swap in practice area, jurisdiction, client details, dispute facts, and damages to draft any demand.
Generate a warm, professional consultation follow-up email with issue summary, next steps, and a soft call to action.
Turn your verified case list into a memo outline grouped by sub-issue, ordered persuasively — the AI works only with cases you provide.
Draft a direct, compassionate email delivering bad news to a client, explaining what happened and presenting next options.
Draft a warm cover email that introduces the engagement letter, summarizes the fee structure, and explains how to sign and return.
Aggregate a clause review into a CEO-ready dashboard — heat map, top three risks with financial ranges, negotiation priorities, and a three-sentence executive summary.
Convert raw legal analysis into two polished deliverables in one shot — a one-page traffic-light executive memo and a full legal memo with redlines and appendix.
Generates a side-by-side comparison table of breach notification rules under California's CCPA/CPRA, Virginia's VCDPA, and Colorado's CPA — triggers, timelines, penalties.
Organize verified cases into a structured analysis with sub-issues, majority/minority positions, and circuit splits — closed-set, no added citations.
Walk through every clause with explicit reasoning, a 1-10 risk score, suggested redlines, and a confidence rating you can verify line by line.
Run the same contract through three lenses — your client, the counterparty, and a neutral court — to surface trade space and a clean negotiation playbook.
One prompt, six stages, full audit trail — runs the entire intake-to-deliverable pipeline inside a single Claude session with global anti-hallucination rules.
A complete mega-prompt that produces a formal litigation memo analyzing defenses, independent creation, invalidity, and recommended next steps after a patent C&D.
Drafts interrogatories to a manufacturer in a house fire case from the incident records, pleaded claims and topics you paste. No defect theory or allegation appears unless your material supports it, and any limit on the number comes only from rule text you paste.
Turns a messy fact pattern and a loosely worded question into precisely framed research questions, the facts each one depends on, and search terms to run in your database. It states no answer, no doctrine and no authority.
Builds an outline of a motion from the facts with record cites, the governing rule text and the authorities you paste. Every fact carries its cite, every argument rests on pasted authority, and gaps are marked for you.
Turns a litigation fact pattern into a list of research questions. Each issue is tied to the facts that bear on it and carries an authority-needed marker, so the model names the questions and you find the law.
Stress-tests your draft argument. It generates the other side's best counterarguments, each tied to a record cite or an authority you pasted, then your possible replies drawn from the same material. Internal work product.
Drafts a status update email to a litigation client from the developments and next steps you supply. Each development needs a source, each date is yours, and the tone follows the client profile you pick. No predictions, no advice.
Draft an empathetic but firm client email recommending rejection of a personal injury settlement offer, built only on your figures, counter and dates.
Review a commercial lease from the tenant's perspective: top 5 risks, missing protective clauses, ambiguous language, and section-specific redlines with proposed wording.
Turns intake notes and the documents in hand into a candid internal evaluation memo: liability by element, comparative fault exposure, documented versus undocumented damages, collectability, evidence to preserve, and an accept / decline / investigate recommendation.
Builds the deadline and notice checklist for a new PI matter using only the statute text and dates you paste. Every period without supplied text is marked [VERIFY DEADLINE], every computed date shows its arithmetic, and tolling issues come back as questions.
Separates the client's documented baseline from post-incident findings, builds a quoted before/after comparison for each body part, anticipates the defense reading of the same records, and drafts the questions to put to the treating physician.
Itemizes every recommended future treatment from treating-provider records and any life care plan, with the source quote, frequency, duration and unit cost only where a source supplies it. Unsourced costs are marked, never estimated.
Computes past lost wages from pay records, employer letters, tax documents and disability notes with every step of arithmetic shown, reconciles the documents against each other, and separates future earning capacity into a list of what the economist or vocational expert must supply.
Turns client interview notes, a symptom diary and witness statements into a specific before/after narrative of daily-life impact for a demand package. Every sentence is traceable to a source, tied to dated records where they exist, with no unsupported adjectives and no dollar figure.
Drafts a time-limited policy-limits demand that can be accepted exactly as written, and checks every term against the governing statute or case text you paste in. It states no state requirement or bad-faith standard on its own.
Drafts an uninsured or underinsured motorist claim letter to the client's own carrier from the policy text you paste, and flags every notice, exhaustion and consent-to-settle condition whose compliance is not shown in your materials.
Audits every lien and reimbursement claim on a settlement (Medicare, Medicaid, ERISA or other health plan, provider liens, med-pay), isolates unrelated charges and arithmetic errors, then drafts the reduction request. It never says a doctrine applies without the governing text.
Tests each reason the adjuster gave against your demand package, separates the reasons the record answers from the ones that expose a real weakness, proposes a counter using only your figures, and drafts the response letter.
Checks the arithmetic of a settlement closing statement against the fee agreement terms, costs and liens you supply, flags anything that does not reconcile, then writes a plain-English letter explaining each line to the client.
Drafts the letter that puts a settlement offer in front of the client for decision: the offer and its terms, a net-to-client estimate with the arithmetic shown, the risks of accepting and of rejecting as you describe them, and a signature block recording the choice.
Drafts a negligence complaint from your facts, with every allegation traced to a supplied fact, each element mapped to its supporting paragraphs, and a gap table for elements with no fact behind them.
Drafts single-fact requests for admission that narrow the dispute, each tied to the evidence behind it and the element it helps prove, with the numerical limit and timing left for you to confirm.
Compares the requests you served with the responses and objections you received, classifies every deficiency with both texts quoted, and drafts the meet-and-confer letter with your response date.
Builds a deposition outline for a defense IME physician, biomechanical engineer or accident reconstructionist from the report and CV: bias, materials not reviewed, methodology, and every assumption set against the quoted record.
Drafts the plaintiff's mediation statement: liability in evidence order, damages with documented totals and visible arithmetic, the defense's best arguments answered from the record, and a separate confidential section for the mediator.
Outlines motions in limine item by item: the evidence, the ground, the authority you supplied or a flag where authority is needed, the record foundation, the anticipated opposition and proposed order language.
Builds a plaintiff's opening statement outline only from evidence you list as admissible and expected, with a table mapping every statement to the witness or exhibit that will prove it and a list of statements removed for lack of proof.
Turns first-consultation notes and the documents received into an internal assessment memo: safety concerns first, the issues in play, what is documented versus only told, urgent matters, documents to collect, client questions and immediate tasks. It states no law and predicts no outcome.
Reconciles a financial disclosure or affidavit, yours or the other party's, against the bank statements, pay records and tax documents you paste. It recomputes the arithmetic, lists accounts and income in the documents that the disclosure omits, lists unexplained transfers, and drafts follow-up document requests.
Builds the asset and debt inventory from the documents you paste: title holder, acquisition date, documented source of funds, each value with its source and date, and each debt balance. Characterization appears only under rule text you paste; tracing questions are listed; it values nothing itself.
Applies the guideline text or official worksheet you paste to the income documents you supply, showing each step's arithmetic and tracing each input to a document. Anything the text leaves open, and any deviation, comes back as a question. With no guideline text pasted, it computes nothing.
Drafts a parenting plan from the parents' work schedules, the child's school and activity calendar and the terms you supply: schedule, holidays and vacations, exchanges, decision-making, communication, travel and dispute resolution. Every term comes from your inputs; a topic with no input is left for you to complete.
Drafts the client's declaration or affidavit supporting temporary orders from the client's own account: first-hand facts only, each dated and specific, in the client's voice, tied to the exhibits you list. What the client learned from others is held out and listed for your decision. No conclusions, no characterization of the other parent, no legal standard.
Outlines a motion for temporary orders request by request: the relief, each supporting fact tied to its source, the standard exactly as you paste it, the anticipated response and marker-free proposed order language.
Finds the gaps in the financial documents you supply and drafts neutral interrogatories and requests for production on income, accounts, business interests, debts and transfers. Limits, response time and required instructions come only from rule text you paste.
Reviews a proposed settlement agreement or term sheet against your client's goals and the financial documents: missing, ambiguous and inconsistent terms, figures that do not reconcile, obligations with no enforcement mechanism, and a redline list of clarifications.
Turns an export of co-parenting app or text messages into a dated chronology: each entry quoted, sender identified, topic tagged, with counts by topic and the messages that could matter either way.
Drafts a plain-English email telling a family law client where the case stands, what the client must do and by when, and what the firm will do, using only your notes and the order or notice you paste.
Builds the internal mediation preparation memo: an issues list, your client's priorities and limits as you give them, the other side's positions with sources, figures reconciled against the documents, package proposals built only from your ranges, and questions to settle with the client.
Turns the charging document, arrest report and intake notes into an internal memo: each charge with elements from statute text you paste, the facts alleged for each element and their source, custody status, immediate tasks and client questions.
Compares police reports, supplemental reports, witness statements and any transcript: one timeline with every time stamp and source, each inconsistency quoted side by side, facts asserted with no stated basis of knowledge, items referred to but not produced, and follow-up discovery to request.
Converts a body-camera or interview transcript into a neutral, time-stamped chronology: who said what, quoted, moments to review tagged without any legal conclusion, time-stamp gaps counted and inaudible passages listed.
Builds a suppression motion outline from the record: the evidence at issue, the sequence of police conduct with quotes and time stamps, each ground with the authority you paste or an authority-needed marker, the prosecution's likely facts, hearing witnesses and exhibits, and proposed findings.
Drafts the discovery demand letter to the prosecutor: an inventory of what you received, the items the reports refer to but the prosecution has not produced, specific requests tied to those references and the legal basis only as you paste it. Attorney-only notes come first and the letter follows.
Outlines a motion for release or bond reduction: the current conditions, the release factors exactly as the statute or rule text you paste states them, the documented facts for each factor with sources, proposed conditions, and documents and witnesses to bring. Nothing on the alleged offense beyond the charging document.
Builds an internal memo comparing a plea offer with trial, using only the offer, the statute or guideline text and the evidence assessment you paste. Collateral consequences come back as questions with an authority-needed marker, and the model predicts no conviction odds and no sentence.
Drafts the letter that conveys a plea offer to the client for decision. The offer is restated in plain English, the alternatives are in your words, unknowns are listed, and a signature block records the client's decision. No pressure, no prediction and no legal consequence from memory.
Builds a cross-examination outline for a police witness from the officer's reports, prior testimony and the recordings transcript. Leading, one-fact questions, impeachment chapters built on quoted inconsistencies, and omissions only where the documents show them.
Outlines a sentencing memorandum for the defense from the records, treatment letters and character letters you paste. Each mitigating fact carries its source, the sentence requested is yours, and the sentencing factors appear only as the pasted text states them.
Prepares your first client interview from the charging document and the reports in hand. Topics are grouped by subject with neutral open-ended questions, documents and contacts to request, and matters you must explain yourself, with every answer box left empty.
Checks sealing or expungement eligibility strictly against the statute text you paste: each condition quoted, the matching record fact with its source, waiting periods computed from supplied dates, disqualifying entries and missing records. With no statute pasted it concludes nothing.
Pro members get the Prompt Runner: fill in variables, choose your model, and get output with anti-hallucination checks.
See Plans* These prompts are drafting and analysis aids for licensed attorneys. They are not legal advice and do not replace professional judgment. AI output can contain errors, including invented citations and incorrect deadlines: verify every fact, figure, authority and deadline against primary sources before relying on it. Rules vary by jurisdiction, and you remain responsible for the final work product.