---
name: legal-strategy-summary
title: Legal Strategy Summary
description: Generates structured litigation strategy summaries synthesizing case facts, legal arguments, procedural tactics, and risk assessments into a unified roadmap. Use when aligning legal teams on case direction, preparing for strategy meetings, or onboarding stakeholders to litigation matters.
author: CaseMark
author_url: https://github.com/CaseMark/skills/tree/main/skills/legal/legal-strategy-summary
license: Apache-2.0
version: 0.1.0
execution_mode: open
jurisdiction: general
practice: litigation
language: en
---

# Legal Strategy Summary

Produces an internal strategic roadmap covering case posture, motion and discovery planning, settlement analysis, and prioritized action items.

## Prerequisites

- **Case materials** — complaints, answers, correspondence, prior orders, key exhibits
- **Client objectives** — desired outcome, risk tolerance, budget constraints
- **Jurisdictional context** — forum, governing law, pending procedural deadlines
- **Party roles** — plaintiff/defendant/third-party posture and relationships

## Quick Start

1. Gather case materials and client objectives
2. Draft executive overview accessible to non-lawyer stakeholders
3. Build legal framework per cause of action/defense
4. Map motion and discovery strategy to case schedule
5. Assess settlement posture and risks
6. Produce prioritized action items with owners and deadlines

## Output Sections

### 1. Executive Overview

| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Case nature | Dispute type, parties, forum |
| Client position | Plaintiff/defendant posture summary |
| Strategic goal | Primary objective — one sentence |
| Key risk flag | Single biggest threat to success |

No legal jargon without parenthetical explanation.

### 2. Factual Background

- Organize chronologically or thematically — whichever better supports the strategy
- Cite specific documents/exhibits for each material fact
- Flag disputed vs. undisputed facts
- Omit facts that don't drive legal analysis

### 3. Legal Framework

Per cause of action or defense:

| Component | Detail |
|---|---|
| Claim/defense | Name and statutory/common law basis |
| Elements | Numbered required elements |
| Burden | Who bears it; standard (preponderance, clear & convincing, etc.) |
| Controlling authority | Key statutes, lead cases |
| Strengths | Favorable facts and law |
| Weaknesses | Gaps, adverse facts, unfavorable precedent |
| Counterarguments | Anticipated opposition arguments and rebuttals |

### 4. Motion Strategy

Per anticipated motion:

- **Motion** — type
- **Legal basis** — rule/statute
- **Strategic purpose** — dispositive, narrow issues, force disclosure, etc.
- **Timing** — when to file relative to case schedule
- **Success likelihood** — High/Medium/Low with one-line rationale

### 5. Discovery Strategy

| Category | Plan |
|---|---|
| Must obtain | Key documents/testimony needed; from whom |
| Must protect | Privilege, work product, trade secrets |
| Offensive use | How discovery strengthens affirmative case |
| Defensive use | Limiting opponent's discovery leverage |
| ESI considerations | Preservation obligations, custodians, date ranges |

### 6. Settlement & ADR Assessment

- Settlement posture and recommended range (if assessable)
- Optimal timing for discussions
- ADR suitability — mediation, arbitration, early neutral evaluation
- BATNA — best/worst/likely trial outcomes vs. settlement value

### 7. Risk Assessment

| Risk Factor | Rating | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liability exposure | H/M/L | $ range or outcome | Reduction strategy |
| Adverse ruling on key motion | H/M/L | Effect on case | Fallback approach |
| Witness credibility | H/M/L | Claims affected | Corroboration plan |
| Cost trajectory | H/M/L | Estimated burn rate | Cost controls |

### 8. Action Items

Per item: **Action**, **Owner** (if identifiable), **Deadline** (date or trigger), **Priority** (Critical / High / Standard).

## Pitfalls & Checks

- Assess strengths and weaknesses candidly — this is internal strategy, not advocacy
- Cite specific evidence and authority for every recommendation; no unsupported assertions
- Flag critical deadlines (SOL, response deadlines, scheduling order dates) prominently
- Mark unverified governing law or jurisdiction-specific rules with `[VERIFY]`
- Adapt section depth to case complexity — early-stage summaries may have lighter discovery/motion sections
- Reference privileged communications by date and subject only; never quote verbatim

---