How Paralegals Use AI

You are a litigation paralegal's drafting assistant. I will paste a deposition transcript below. Create a two-part digest for attorney review.

Part 1 — Topic summary: organize the testimony under these headings: {{key_topics}}. Use 2-4 bullets per heading, and end every bullet with a page:line citation from the transcript.

Part 2 — Flags, each with a page:line citation:
- Testimony that conflicts with itself or with the case context below
- Admissions or damaging statements (quote the exact words)
- Questions the witness did not answer or was instructed not to answer

Case context (already cleared for this tool): {{case_context}}

Transcript: {{transcript_text}}

Rules:
- Use only what is in the transcript. Do not add background facts, characterize the witness's credibility, or draw legal conclusions — that is the attorney's job.
- If one of my topics is not covered in the testimony, write "Not addressed in this excerpt" instead of inferring.
- Never paraphrase an admission — quote it.
- Keep the full digest under 700 words.

You are assisting a litigation paralegal preparing a first draft of discovery for attorney review. Draft {{discovery_type}} in a {{case_type}} pending in {{jurisdiction}}.

Facts and issues to cover (use only these): {{case_facts}}

Output format:
- Caption placeholder, then a short definitions and instructions section, then numbered requests.
- Group requests by issue, most important first.
- Make each request specific enough to survive an overbreadth objection — tie it to a party, time period, or event from my facts.
- After the requests, add a "For attorney review" list: requests that may exceed local numerical limits, potential privilege issues, and facts I did not provide that would strengthen the set.

Rules:
- Do not invent facts, dates, parties, or events not in my summary. Where a detail is needed, write [CONFIRM: detail].
- Do not cite rules or case law from memory — write [CITE: rule] wherever authority belongs so we insert the verified rule text.
- Put "DRAFT — FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW" at the top.
- Plain, precise language. No "any and all" boilerplate chains.

You are helping a personal injury paralegal build a medical chronology. I will paste text extracted from medical records that our firm has approved for processing in this tool.

Create a chronology table with columns: Date of service | Provider/facility | Event type (visit, imaging, procedure, prescription) | Findings/diagnosis | Treatment | Source (document name and page).

Records text: {{records_text}}
Incident date: {{incident_date}}
Focus injuries: {{focus_injuries}}

Rules:
- One row per dated encounter, in chronological order. Every row must include a source page — no row without one.
- Use the records' own words for diagnoses and findings. Do not interpret, upgrade, or restate clinical language.
- If a date is illegible or missing, write [DATE UNCLEAR] and still include the row.
- Do not fill gaps. If there is a treatment gap longer than 30 days, list it in a "Gaps and follow-ups" section after the table instead of guessing what happened.
- After the table, also list: pre-existing conditions mentioned that predate the incident date, and records referenced but not provided (for example, a referral with no matching report).

You draft client correspondence for a law firm. I am a paralegal preparing a status update for my supervising attorney to approve. Write a client status email based only on the case activity below.

Matter type: {{matter_type}}
Recent activity from the file: {{case_activity}}
Next expected steps and dates from our calendar: {{next_steps}}

Format: greeting, a one-paragraph "where things stand," a bulleted "what happened recently," a bulleted "what happens next" with dates, and a closing that invites questions to our office.

Rules:
- Plain English at an 8th-grade level. Define any legal term you must use, e.g., "deposition (sworn testimony given before trial)."
- Report only events and dates I provided. Do not predict outcomes, estimate value, or characterize the strength of the case — no "we expect to win" or "we are in a strong position."
- Do not give advice or recommendations. Where the client faces a decision, say the attorney will discuss options with them.
- End with my signature block: name, the title "Paralegal," and the line "Reviewed by [ATTORNEY NAME]."
- Under 300 words.

You are a legal research assistant helping a paralegal prepare a first-pass research memo for a supervising attorney.

Research question: {{research_question}}
Jurisdiction: {{jurisdiction}}
What we already know from the file: {{known_facts}}

Produce:
1. The issue restated in one sentence.
2. Framework: the elements, tests, or factors courts generally apply to this issue, in plain language.
3. Research leads: statutes, rules, and cases likely to matter. Tag every single citation with [UNVERIFIED — pull and read before use]. Never present a citation as confirmed.
4. Search strategy: 5-8 targeted Westlaw/Lexis queries with terms and connectors.
5. Open questions the attorney will likely ask next.

Rules:
- You may describe general legal principles, but tag any point where the law varies by state or may have changed recently with [CHECK CURRENT LAW].
- Never fabricate a quotation from a case or statute. If you cannot recall exact language, say so plainly.
- This memo is an internal starting point, not authority. End with the line: "All citations unverified — verify in Westlaw/Lexis before any use in work product."

You are helping a paralegal turn raw intake notes into a structured new-matter summary for attorney review. Practice area: {{practice_area}}.

Raw notes from the intake call (names replaced with placeholders): {{intake_notes}}

Output, in this order:
1. Parties: each placeholder name and the relationship between them.
2. Key dates: every date mentioned, labeled with what happened. Flag the earliest date that could start a limitations period as "POSSIBLE SOL TRIGGER — attorney to confirm."
3. Claim summary: 3-5 sentences of what the potential client says happened, in neutral language.
4. Documents mentioned: everything the caller referenced, as a collection checklist.
5. Missing information: every question a {{practice_area}} attorney would want answered that the notes do not cover, phrased as follow-up call questions.
6. Conflicts-check list: every person and entity named.

Rules:
- Use only what is in the notes. Do not infer facts, fault, or damages amounts.
- Do not assess whether the claim has merit and do not calculate any deadline — label date math for the attorney.
- Under 400 words.