PI Intake Screening Checklist Generator for Paralegals
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.
The Prompt
Variables (6)
| Variable | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| {{case_type}} | Type of PI Case | Premises liability / slip and fall |
| {{governing_state}} | Governing State | Colorado |
| {{firm_criteria}} | Firm Case Criteria | We take clear-liability cases with documented injury and treatment within 30 days. We do not take cases against our existing corporate clients. |
| {{score_threshold}} | Attorney-Review Score Threshold | 12 |
| {{known_facts}} | Known Facts From Inquiry | Web form: fell on an icy walkway at a grocery store on 01/09/2026, wrist fracture. No other details. |
| {{authority_text}} | Limitation and Notice Statute Text | Paste the verbatim text of the limitation and any government notice statutes, or write NONE. |
Expected Output
A phone-ready intake screening form with section headings and Yes / No / Unknown boxes tailored to the case type: incident facts, liability indicators, injuries and treatment, damages indicators, insurance, neutral red-flag questions, documents to request now, evidence to preserve now and follow-up questions. A scoring grid with the item-by-item maximum and your threshold applied exactly, limitation and notice lines marked for verification, attorney notes on proposed weights, and a verification list.
Usage Notes
Use to build or refresh the form your intake staff reads on a first call. Paste your firm's acceptance criteria and your own threshold, and paste the verbatim limitation and notice text if you want it quoted beside the date lines; the prompt computes no deadline and never states that a claim is timely. Failure modes to watch: red-flag questions worded as reasons to decline, a limitation period or retention period the model supplied, invented scoring weights not labeled as proposals, and statements to the caller about case value. Review the scoring grid sum yourself. Not legal advice. The attorney remains responsible for verifying every fact, figure and authority before use.
Double-check before use
- Add the scoring weights yourself and compare the maximum with the threshold. In testing, the stated maximum was once wrong.
- Check that no notice period or case cited in a memo is printed on the form.
These are the places where this prompt was seen to slip when tested on sample cases with a small AI model.
Originally featured in: AI for Personal Injury Lawyers: Prompts for Demand Letters, Medical Summaries & Depositions
Related Prompts
Chronological Medical Treatment Summary From Records for PI Cases
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.
Draft Interrogatories to the Defendant in a Personal Injury Case
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.
Defendant Driver Deposition Outline for a Motor Vehicle Accident Case (Claude)
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.
Claude Prompt: Full Personal Injury Demand Letter from Your Records and Valuation Inputs
Generate a full personal injury demand letter with recomputed itemized damages, using only the valuation method, demand and response date you supply.
* 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.