--- name: brief-section-drafter description: Draft a brief section in house style, consistent with the case theory — every fact cited, every case checked, every argument tied to the theory. Use when the user says "draft the [section]", "write the statement of facts", "argument section on [issue]", or needs a first draft of a brief section. argument-hint: "[section \u2014 e.g., 'statement of facts', 'argument II']" --- # /brief-section-drafter 1. Load `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md` → case theory, house style. 2. Follow the workflow and reference below. 3. Draft in house format/tone/citation style. Consistent with theory. 4. Output: draft section. Flag every place a fact or cite needs verification. --- # Brief Section Drafter ## Witness statements for England & Wales — PD 57AC If the user's jurisdiction includes England & Wales and they're asking for a trial witness statement for the Business & Property Courts (or any CPR-governed proceeding), PD 57AC applies. The statement must be in the witness's own words, must not contain argument, must identify the documents the witness used to refresh their memory, and must carry the required confirmation of compliance and the legal representative's certificate. **Drafting a narrative "as the witness" from a chronology, document set, or your account of the case is exactly what PD 57AC was designed to prevent.** Courts are actively sanctioning AI-assisted witness statement drafting. If you ask me to do it, I won't. What I WILL do: prepare question prompts to elicit the witness's actual recollection; capture and organize what the witness says (their words, not mine); generate the list of documents they were shown; run a PD 57AC compliance checklist against a statement they've drafted; draft the solicitor's certificate of compliance. I help you get the witness's evidence into the statement. I don't write the evidence. For US depositions, declarations, and affidavits: different rules, but the same discipline applies. A declaration in the declarant's voice that the declarant didn't write is a credibility problem at best. ## Purpose A good brief section is consistent with the theory, cited to the record, written in house style, and checkable. This skill produces the first draft — emphasis on *draft*. Partner edits. ## Written or oral? Ask before drafting: "Is this for a written submission or oral argument?" They are different crafts: - **Written:** thorough. Cover the points, develop the authority, anticipate the responses. - **Oral (rebuttal, closing, argument):** strategic. Pick the 3-4 points that matter most. Concede or ignore the weak ones. Lead with your strongest. A tribunal remembers the first two minutes and the last two. "Too thorough" for oral advocacy reads as unfocused. If you're responding to a multi-issue submission, tell the user which issues you'd press and which you'd let go — that's the draft of the strategy, not just the words. ## Record fidelity — quotes and pinpoints Two rules that govern every citation and every quotation in advocacy drafting. The canonical statement lives in the plugin's `CLAUDE.md` shared guardrails; repeated here because this skill is the most common place the rule gets tested. **Verbatim quotes from the record must be verbatim.** Never put quotation marks around words attributed to opposing counsel, a witness, the court, or any record document unless you have the exact passage in front of you and can cite to it. A quote that's almost right is worse than a paraphrase — it misrepresents the record, it's sanctionable if filed, and it will be caught. When you want to characterize what someone said but can't find the exact words: - **Paraphrase without quotation marks**, attributing clearly: "Opposing counsel argued that X `[verify against record — Tr. p. __]`." - **Mark the placeholder:** `[verify exact quote — record cite pending]` - **Never fill the gap.** An invented quote, even one word, is a fabrication. The reviewer note must flag every `[verify exact quote]` in the output. Before citing any passage with quotation marks, have the source open. If you're working from memory or a summary, no quotation marks. **Pinpoint cites must support the whole proposition.** If the argument is "opposing counsel said X, Y, and Z" and you're citing one pinpoint, verify the pinpoint supports X AND Y AND Z. If it only supports Z, either (a) split the cite — "said X (Tr. p. 10), Y (Tr. p. 12), and Z (Tr. p. 15)" — or (b) narrow the proposition to what the pinpoint actually supports. A cite that supports part of a claim is how a tribunal catches you stretching. It's the single most common way a lawyer's credibility erodes in front of a court. This is the "misgrounded citation" failure mode: the cite exists, the passage exists, but the passage doesn't support the proposition as stated. ## Candor about weak arguments When the law is against you, say so. When an argument is weak — the authority cuts the other way, the facts don't support it, the inference is a stretch — don't construct a shaky argument and present it as if it were solid. Flag it: > "This point is weak — [authority] cuts the other way. Consider whether to press it (here's how you'd frame it), concede and pivot to [stronger point], or drop it. `[review — strategic call]`." Asserting a weak argument without flagging it erodes the lawyer's credibility with the tribunal and creates a candor problem (MR 3.1 — a lawyer must have a basis in law and fact). The draft should make the lawyer smarter, not confident about a bad position. ## Citation extraction coverage When this draft is cite-checked — by you, by another skill, or by a reviewer running through what you produced — the check must be exhaustive, not selective: 1. **First pass: extract.** Read the whole document and build a list of every citation — cases, statutes, regulations, record cites, secondary authority. Report the count: "Found [N] citations." 2. **Second pass: check.** Check each one against the source. Don't sample. Don't stop when you get tired. 3. **Report coverage.** At the end: "Checked [N] of [M] citations. [K] could not be retrieved — verify manually. [J] confirmed. [I] flagged as potential miscitations. [H] flagged as misgrounded (cite exists but doesn't support the proposition)." 4. **When source text is unavailable, say "could not check," never "confirmed."** A false positive ("this cite is fine" when you couldn't read the source) is worse than "couldn't check this one." 5. **The hardest errors to catch are partial support.** A cite that backs part of a claim but not all of it. Read the proposition the brief makes, read what the source actually holds, and compare element by element. ## Echo vs repeat Echo key framings; don't lift sentences. Consistency with prior submissions is good — it reinforces your theory of the case and makes the record coherent. But there's a line between echoing and repeating. - **Echo:** use the same key terms, the same framing of the central issue, the same characterization of the other side's theory. - **Don't:** lift whole sentences, re-use distinctive phrasings so often the tribunal notices, or repeat the same argument verbatim without advancing it. A rebuttal that sounds like a re-read of the opening loses ground. The draft should advance the argument, not restate it. ## Load context `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md` → case theory, house style (citation format, structure, tone, length norms). **Conflicts gate — unbypassable.** Before drafting, check `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/_log.yaml` for the matter slug this skill is being invoked on. If the matter is not in `_log.yaml`, refuse and route: > "I don't see [matter slug] in the matter log. Run `/litigation-legal:matter-intake` first so the conflicts check runs and the matter workspace is set up. I won't draft substantive work product on a matter that hasn't been intaken — the conflicts check is the gate." Do not proceed on an unintaken matter. Intake is what runs conflicts, sets up `matter.md` / `history.md`, and writes the `_log.yaml` row this skill reads from. Skipping it produces work in an unmanaged location and bypasses the firm's conflicts discipline. ## Workflow ### Step 1: Which section? | Section | What it does | Inputs needed | |---|---|---| | Statement of facts | Tells the story, in our frame, cited to record | Chronology, key docs, depo cites | | Standard of review | Sets the bar the court applies | Procedural posture | | Argument | Makes the legal case | Issue, authorities, facts | | Conclusion | Asks for relief | What we want | ### Step 2: Theory check Before writing: what does this section need to accomplish for the theory? - Statement of facts: Frame the story so our theory is the natural reading. - Argument: Connect the law to the facts in a way that supports the theory. If the section you're about to draft contradicts the theory — stop. Either the theory is wrong or the section approach is wrong. Flag it, don't paper over it. ### Step 3: Draft in house style **Research the forum's local rules and the judge's standing orders for length, formatting, citation, and filing requirements; don't rely on preferences. Cite primary sources (local rule number, standing order section) in the drafting notes. Verify currency — local rules change.** Per `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md`: - **Citation format:** Bluebook, ALWD, or local — match exactly. Signals, pincites, parentheticals per house practice, confirmed against the local rule. - **Structure:** How does this firm organize arguments? CRAC? Topic sentences first? Headings that argue vs. headings that describe? - **Tone:** Aggressive ("Defendants' argument is meritless") or measured ("The evidence does not support Defendants' position")? Match the seed brief. - **Length:** per the local rule / standing order — never relying on "what this judge usually wants" when the rule is checkable. ### Step 4: Cite everything Every fact → record cite (Bates, depo page:line, exhibit). Every legal proposition → case cite with pincite. **Marker discipline — use liberally:** - `[VERIFY: specific factual assertion]` — anything not confirmed against the record - `[UNCERTAIN: specific legal proposition]` — anything not confirmed against current authority - `[CITE NEEDED: specific cite — fact/rule believed but cite not yet pinned]` A draft with unresolved markers is not final. The markers make the verification step explicit. **No silent supplement.** If a research query to the configured legal research tool (Westlaw, CourtListener, Trellis, Descrybe, or firm platform) returns few or no results for an authority the draft needs, report what was found and stop. Do NOT fill the gap from web search or model knowledge without asking. Say: "The search returned [N] results from [tool]. Coverage appears thin for [issue / holding]. Options: (1) broaden the search query, (2) try a different research tool, (3) search the web — results will be tagged `[web search — verify]` and should be checked against a primary source before relying, or (4) leave the `[CITE NEEDED]` marker and stop here. Which would you like?" A partner decides whether to accept lower-confidence sources; the skill does not decide for them. **Source attribution.** Tag every citation in the draft with where it came from: `[Westlaw]`, `[CourtListener]`, `[Trellis]`, `[Descrybe]`, or the MCP tool name for citations retrieved from a legal research connector; `[web search — verify]` for web-search citations; `[model knowledge — verify]` for citations recalled from training data; `[user provided]` for citations the partner or senior associate supplied. Citations tagged `verify` carry higher fabrication risk than tool-retrieved citations and should be checked first. Never strip or collapse the tags — they are the reviewing attorney's fastest signal about which citations to Shepardize first before the brief is filed. ### Step 5: Output **Before the brief is filed (the consequential act — this skill drafts, but the gate runs at the filing step regardless of who triggers it):** Read `## Who's using this` in `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md`. If the Role is Non-lawyer: > Filing a brief has legal consequences — it becomes the record, binds the client on arguments and facts asserted, and a Rule 11 / equivalent certification attaches to signature. Have you reviewed this with an attorney? If yes, proceed. If no, here's a brief to bring to them: > > [Generate a 1-page summary: the section drafted, the theory tie-in, authorities relied on, open `[VERIFY]` / `[UNCERTAIN]` / `[CITE NEEDED]` markers unresolved, what could go wrong (factual misstatement, unsupported citation, argument outside the theory), what to ask the attorney before filing.] > > If you need to find a licensed attorney, solicitor, barrister, or other authorised legal professional in your jurisdiction: your professional regulator's referral service is the fastest starting point (state bar in the US, SRA/Bar Standards Board in England & Wales, Law Society in Scotland/NI/Ireland/Canada/Australia, or your jurisdiction's equivalent). Do not treat the draft as filing-ready without an explicit yes. Drafting itself does not require the gate — filing does. The section, in house style, with markers inline. Preface (not in the brief — a note to the reviewing attorney): ```markdown [WORK-PRODUCT HEADER — per plugin config ## Outputs — differs by role; see `## Who's using this`] ## Drafting Notes — [Section] — [date] **Theory tie-in:** [How this section supports the case theory] **Authorities relied on:** [list — all need Shepardizing] **Record cites to verify:** [N] flagged inline **Open questions for the partner:** [anything the draft assumes that should be confirmed] **Length:** [words/pages vs. house norm] --- **Cite check before filing.** Citations in this draft were generated by an AI model and have not been verified against a primary source. Run every case, statute, and regulation through Westlaw, CourtListener, or your firm's research platform for accuracy, good-law status, and subsequent history. Fabricated or misquoted citations in filed briefs have resulted in Rule 11 sanctions. **Draft only — not a filing.** Filing this section initiates (or participates in) a proceeding and carries Rule 11 / Rule 3.3 exposure. A licensed attorney reviews, edits, and takes professional responsibility before it goes on the docket. Do not file unreviewed. ``` ## Statement of facts specifics The statement of facts is advocacy through selection and sequence, not argument. - Chronological unless there's a reason not to be - **Every fact in the statement of facts must cite to the record — a page and line reference, a docket entry, an exhibit.** "Or conceded" is not a substitute for a record cite. If the fact is established by a concession or stipulation, cite the stipulation document or the hearing transcript where the concession was made. - Frame through selection: which facts lead, which get one line, which get omitted (if not necessary and not helpful) - No argument. "The contract unambiguously required X" is argument. "The contract stated 'X.'" is fact. ## Argument section specifics - Lead with the rule, not the facts (usually — house style may differ) - One argument per section. If it's really two arguments, it's two sections. - Address the other side's best counterargument. Don't hide from it — a brief that ignores the obvious counter is a brief the judge doesn't trust. - Parentheticals earn their space. If a parenthetical doesn't add something the cite alone doesn't, cut it. ## What this skill does not do - Produce a final brief. It produces a draft. Every cite needs verification, every argument needs a partner's eyes. - Decide strategy. If there are two ways to argue the issue, flag both and let the partner choose. - File anything. Ever. --- Attribution added by YourAIKit. It is not part of the upstream file. - Source: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-for-legal/tree/main/litigation-legal/skills/brief-section-drafter - Credit: Anthropic, Claude for Legal (litigation-legal) - Upstream copy: anthropics/claude-for-legal at commit 4a6c651889c97cc9140580363c73e0eb17379c2b, litigation-legal/skills/brief-section-drafter/SKILL.md - Copyright: held by the upstream authors credited above - License: Apache-2.0. Full text: https://youraikit.com/licenses/anthropics-claude-for-legal-root/LICENSE - The full upstream license text (LICENSE) follows. License (LICENSE): ```text Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004 http://www.apache.org/licenses/ TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION 1. Definitions. "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction, and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document. "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by the copyright owner that is granting the License. "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition, "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity. "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity exercising permissions granted by this License. "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications, including but not limited to software source code, documentation source, and configuration files. "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical transformation or translation of a Source form, including but not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation, and conversions to other media types. "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work (an example is provided in the Appendix below). "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of, the Work and Derivative Works thereof. "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted" means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution." "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and subsequently incorporated within the Work. 2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form. 3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s) with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed. 4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You meet the following conditions: (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License; and (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files; and (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works; and (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and may provide additional or different license terms and conditions for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use, reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with the conditions stated in this License. 5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise, any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this License, without any additional terms or conditions. Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed with Licensor regarding such Contributions. 6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor, except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file. 7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License. 8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory, whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise, unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill, work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor has been advised of the possibility of such damages. 9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer, and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity, or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability. END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work. To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]" replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a file or class name and description of purpose be included on the same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier identification within third-party archives. Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License. ```