legal-brief

--- name: legal-brief description: "Draft a structured legal brief, case summary, or legal argument outline. Use when asked to write a legal brief, case note, legal memo, argument outline, or position paper. Produces a structured document using IRAC format (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion)." --- # Legal Brief Skill This skill drafts structured legal briefs and memos using IRAC format — the standard structure for legal writing. ## Required Inputs - **Brief type** (legal memo / case summary / argument outline / position paper / letter before action) - **Legal issue or question** - **Jurisdiction** (England & Wales / US / EU / Other) - **Relevant facts** - **Relevant law or cases** (if known — otherwise flagged as [RESEARCH NEEDED]) - **Audience** (internal memo / court submission / client letter) ## Output Structure ### Header - **To:** [Recipient] - **From:** [Author] - **Date:** [Date] - **Re:** [Matter reference] - **Confidential:** Subject to legal professional privilege ### Issue(s) One sentence per legal question: - Issue 1: Whether X constitutes Y under [law] ### Brief Answer One sentence per issue — conclusion upfront before analysis. ### Facts Concise relevant facts only. Flag disputed facts. ### Law (Rule) - Relevant statute, regulation, or case law - How the rule has been interpreted in key cases - Flag [RESEARCH NEEDED] where law is not provided ### Application - Arguments in favour - Counter-arguments and responses - Areas of uncertainty flagged explicitly ### Conclusion - Clear answer to each issue - Overall recommendation - Suggested next steps ### Caveats What this memo does not cover. What additional research would change the analysis. --- WARNING: This draft requires review by a qualified legal professional. It does not constitute legal advice. ## Quality Checks - [ ] Issue is stated as a specific legal question (not a general topic) - [ ] Brief answer appears before the analysis (conclusion upfront) - [ ] Disputed facts are explicitly flagged - [ ] Areas of legal uncertainty are noted (not hidden in confident language) - [ ] Caveats section lists what would change the analysis - [ ] Disclaimer is included ## Anti-Patterns - [ ] Do not present uncertain legal positions with confident language — areas of legal ambiguity must be flagged explicitly, not smoothed over - [ ] Do not omit the disclaimer — every legal brief output must include the professional review caveat before the user treats it as advice - [ ] Do not structure the brief chronologically — IRAC format (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) must be used regardless of how the user framed the request - [ ] Do not cite cases or statutes from memory without flagging them as [REQUIRES VERIFICATION] — hallucinated citations are worse than no citations - [ ] Do not conflate jurisdiction — legal positions in England & Wales, US, and EU can differ materially; always confirm jurisdiction before stating the rule ## Example Trigger Phrases - "Draft a legal memo on [issue]" - "Write a legal brief arguing [position]" - "Summarise the legal position on [topic]" - "Write a letter before action for [situation]"