📁 Legal
Legal Writing Prompt: Memo Draft From Your Research Notes
Draft an objective legal memo from your own verified research: question presented, brief answer, facts, CREAC discussion, counterarguments, and cite checks.
0Reviews
Prompt
Act as a senior associate who edits junior lawyers' objective memos, writes in plain legal English, and never lets an unsupported statement of law into a draft. Inputs: - The assigning partner's question and any limits on scope: [AssignedQuestion] - Jurisdiction and court level: [Jurisdiction] - Facts from the file, with source documents named: [ClientFacts] - My verified research notes: each authority as I cited it, with the holding or rule in my own words and pin cites: [ResearchNotes] - Weaknesses or open questions I already know about: [OpenIssues] - Length limit and house style (headings, citation format): [StyleRules] Generate: 1. A question presented in one sentence that combines the legal issue and the key facts from ClientFacts. 2. A brief answer: probably yes, probably no, or unclear, with a two to three sentence reason. 3. A statement of facts using only ClientFacts, neutral in tone, each fact tied to its source document. 4. A discussion in CREAC order (conclusion, rule, explanation, application, conclusion) for each element. Every rule or explanation sentence must point to an authority in ResearchNotes; mark any sentence without one as [NEEDS AUTHORITY]. 5. A counterarguments section: the strongest arguments for the other side and how ResearchNotes answers them, or does not. 6. A citation check list: every authority used, the proposition it supports in the memo, and a box to confirm the pin cite and that it is still good law. 7. Next steps from OpenIssues: facts to confirm and research still needed. Rules: - Never invent cases, statutes, quotes, or pin cites. Use only authorities in ResearchNotes, exactly as written there. - Objective tone: this memo predicts, it does not argue. This is a drafting aid, not legal advice; a lawyer must review it.
Instructions
Use this only with research you have already verified, and only in a tool your firm approves for client matters; remove client names if your policy requires it. Replace every [bracket]. This is not legal advice: a licensed lawyer must review the draft and check every citation in Westlaw, Lexis, or official sources.
Generated Output
This image was generated using the prompt above.
Examples
Example Input
AssignedQuestion: Can our client, a commercial tenant, terminate its lease early because the landlord failed to repair the building's HVAC for 10 weeks? Scope: constructive eviction only, no damages analysis. Jurisdiction: [State] trial court; state appellate law controls. ClientFacts: Lease section 8.2: landlord maintains "all building systems including HVAC" (Lease, p. 6). Tenant emailed repair requests on June 3, June 17, and July 8 (Emails, Exhibits A to C). Office temperatures reached 88 degrees on several days (facilities log, Exhibit D). Tenant moved staff to remote work on July 15 but has not vacated the premises. Landlord repaired the system on August 12. ResearchNotes: Authority 1: [state supreme court citation, verified]. Rule: constructive eviction requires (1) a substantial interference with the tenant's use caused by the landlord, (2) notice and a reasonable time to cure, and (3) the tenant vacating within a reasonable time. Pin cite [page]. Authority 2: [appellate citation, verified]. Held that a tenant who stayed in possession for months after the problem waived constructive eviction. Pin cite [page]. Authority 3: [appellate citation, verified]. Held that loss of heating in winter for several weeks was a substantial interference in an office lease. Pin cite [page]. OpenIssues: We do not know if the tenant plans to vacate now that the repair is done. No authority yet on partial remote work as "vacating". StyleRules: Under 1,200 words, Bluebook short forms after first cite, headings for each element.
Example Output
QUESTION PRESENTED Under [State] law, can a commercial tenant terminate its lease for constructive eviction when the landlord, obligated by the lease to maintain HVAC, failed to repair it for about 10 weeks after three written requests, and the tenant moved staff to remote work but did not vacate the premises? BRIEF ANSWER Probably no. The tenant can likely show substantial interference and notice, but constructive eviction also requires vacating within a reasonable time (Authority 1). The tenant has not vacated, and the landlord completed the repair on August 12, which makes the claim weak under Authority 2. STATEMENT OF FACTS The lease requires the landlord to maintain "all building systems including HVAC" (Lease, p. 6, section 8.2). The tenant emailed repair requests on June 3, June 17, and July 8 (Exs. A to C). Office temperatures reached 88 degrees on several days (Ex. D). On July 15 the tenant moved staff to remote work; it remains in possession. The landlord repaired the system on August 12. DISCUSSION A. Substantial interference Conclusion: A court would likely find substantial interference. Rule: constructive eviction requires a substantial interference with the tenant's use caused by the landlord (Authority 1, at [pin]). Explanation: loss of heating for several weeks in an office was enough in Authority 3 (at [pin]). Application: about 10 weeks without working HVAC, with temperatures of 88 degrees, is comparable, and the lease placed the duty on the landlord. Conclusion: this element is likely met. B. Notice and time to cure Conclusion: Likely met. Rule: the tenant must give notice and a reasonable time to cure (Authority 1, at [pin]). Application: three written requests over five weeks before the move to remote work. [NEEDS AUTHORITY: what length of time counts as reasonable for an HVAC repair.] Conclusion: likely met, subject to that research. C. Vacating within a reasonable time Conclusion: Likely not met. Rule: the tenant must vacate within a reasonable time (Authority 1, at [pin]). Explanation: a tenant who stayed in possession for months waived the claim (Authority 2, at [pin]). Application: the tenant has not vacated, and moving staff to remote work while keeping the premises is not clearly "vacating". [NEEDS AUTHORITY: partial or functional abandonment.] Now that the repair is done, vacating later would be harder to tie to the interference. Conclusion: this element likely fails. COUNTERARGUMENTS The tenant may argue that moving its staff out was a functional vacating. ResearchNotes has no authority on this point; it is the key open issue. CITATION CHECK LIST [ ] Authority 1: elements of constructive eviction (Discussion A, B, C). Confirm pin cite and good law. [ ] Authority 2: waiver by staying in possession (Brief Answer, C). Confirm pin cite and good law. [ ] Authority 3: loss of heat as substantial interference (A). Confirm pin cite and good law. NEXT STEPS Ask the client whether it intends to vacate and when. Research partial or functional abandonment in [State]. Research what courts treat as a reasonable time to cure for building system repairs. Consider whether other lease remedies fall outside this memo's scope. Draft for attorney review. Not legal advice.