Prompts
Prompts de IA jurídica para Disputes / Litigation
23 prompts you can paste straight into HAQQ or any other assistant. Every one is written out in full - open it, copy it, change the bracketed parts.
Demand LetterMemoAdvancedDraft / Generate
Draft a demand letter on behalf of [Client] to [Opposing Party] regarding [describe dispute]. State the legal basis for the claim, damages suffered of [amount], evidence supporting the claim, and deadline for response/payment before litigation.
Statement of ClaimMemoExpertDraft / Generate
Draft a statement of claim for [Client] against [Defendant] in [Court/Jurisdiction] for [describe cause of action]. Include factual background, legal causes of action, damages claimed, and relief sought.
Statement of DefenseMemoExpertDraft / Generate
Draft a statement of defense for [Defendant] responding to [Claimant's] claim filed in [Court/Case Number]. Address each allegation, assert defenses including [describe defenses], and include any counterclaims.
Settlement AgreementAgreementAdvancedDraft / Generate
Draft a settlement agreement resolving the dispute between [Party A] and [Party B] arising from [describe dispute/litigation]. Include settlement amount, payment terms, mutual releases, confidentiality, non-disparagement, and dismissal of pending claims.
Legal Opinion on DisputeMemoExpertResearch / Authorities
Prepare a legal opinion for [Client] analyzing the merits of [describe potential claim/defense] under [jurisdiction] law. Assess liability exposure, potential damages, likelihood of success, litigation risks, and recommended course of action.
Discovery RequestMemoAdvancedDraft / Generate
Draft discovery requests (interrogatories, requests for production, requests for admission) for [Client] in [Case Name/Number] to obtain evidence regarding [describe key issues]. Ensure requests are relevant, proportionate, and comply with [jurisdiction] rules.
Motion for Summary JudgmentMemoEnterpriseDraft / Generate
Draft a motion for summary judgment for [Client] in [Case Name/Number] arguing that no genuine issues of material fact exist regarding [describe claims/defenses] and [Client] is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Witness StatementMemoAdvancedDraft / Generate
Draft a witness statement for [Witness Name] in [Case Name/Number] covering their knowledge of [describe relevant events/facts]. Include chronological narrative, factual observations, and statement of truth per [jurisdiction] requirements.
Litigation Hold NoticeMemoStandardDraft / Generate
Draft a litigation hold notice for [Company] regarding [describe litigation/anticipated litigation]. Instruct employees to preserve all documents, emails, and data related to [describe subject matter], explain preservation obligations, and provide contact for questions.
Case Assessment MemoMemoAdvancedSummarize / Extract
Prepare a case assessment memo for [Client] regarding [describe dispute]. Summarize the facts, identify legal issues, analyze strengths and weaknesses, estimate potential outcomes and damages, and provide strategic recommendations.
Injunction ApplicationMemoExpertDraft / Generate
Draft an application for [preliminary/permanent] injunction for [Client] in [Case Name/Number] to prevent [Defendant] from [describe conduct]. Address likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of hardships, and public interest.
Enforcement of JudgmentMemoAdvancedStrategy / Scenario
Prepare a strategy memo for enforcing the judgment obtained by [Client] against [Judgment Debtor] in [Case]. Identify available enforcement mechanisms, locate assets, consider domestication requirements if cross-border, and recommend enforcement priorities.
Draft Reply to Department NoticeMemoAdvancedDraft / Generate
Act as an experienced tax lawyer and draft a professional reply to the following Income Tax/GST notice. Use relevant legal provisions, judicial precedents, and maintain a formal tone.
Case Law Research PromptReportAdvancedResearch / Authorities
Provide important case laws related to [topic]. Explain the facts, issue involved, court decision, and practical takeaway for professionals.
Draft Legal NoticeMemoAdvancedDraft / Generate
Draft a legally structured notice for [issue] including facts, legal provisions, demands, and consequences of non-compliance.
Expert Witness Report OutlineReportExpertStrategy / Scenario
Create an outline for an expert witness report on [subject matter] for [case type] proceedings. Include qualifications summary, methodology, factual assumptions, analysis framework, opinions, and limitations/caveats section.
Settlement Agreement TemplateAgreementAdvancedDraft / Generate
Draft a settlement agreement between [Party A] and [Party B] resolving [dispute description]. Include settlement amount/terms, mutual releases, confidentiality provisions, non-disparagement clause, representations, dismissal with prejudice terms, and governing law.
Deposition Outline from Case FactsPlaybookAdvancedDraft / Generate
Build a deposition outline for [witness name or role] in [case name or description]. Organize by topic, not by document, and for each topic give: the question sequence, the answer you expect based on the facts provided, the follow-up question if the witness deflects, and the exhibit (by number) you would introduce to pin the answer down. End with the two or three admissions that would matter most if you got nothing else, and a rough time budget per topic. Case facts and witness background: [PASTE]. For the deposing attorney's use; strategy and admissibility calls remain the attorney's.
Deposition Transcript Timeline and Contradiction FinderMemoExpertSummarize / Extract
Review the deposition transcript(s) below and produce: (1) a chronological timeline of the events the witness describes, citing each entry to a page:line reference; (2) a contradiction list of any statement that conflicts with something else the same witness said, or with another transcript if more than one is provided, quoting both sides with their page:line references; (3) the points where the witness hedged, said 'I don't recall,' or gave a materially different answer on a second attempt. Do not label anything a contradiction unless you can quote both sides. Transcript(s): [PASTE]. For attorney case-prep use only; this is a lead-generation pass, not a certified transcript summary.
Devil's Advocate Stress-Test of Our ArgumentMemoAdvancedStrategy / Scenario
Take the argument below and argue against it as opposing counsel would, as hard as the facts and law honestly allow. Identify the three weakest points in our position, the counterargument most likely to persuade a judge or arbitrator, and any factual gap the other side could exploit that we have not addressed. Then tell me, straight, whether the argument is strong enough to lead with or whether we should lead with a different theory. Our argument: [PASTE].
Settlement Anchor and Walk-Away AnalysisMemoExpertStrategy / Scenario
Act as settlement counsel for [OUR CLIENT] in [MATTER]. Scope: the facts, claim value, costs to date and procedural posture I give you below — build the economics only from those figures. If a number is not supplied, name it as an input required and leave it blank; do not estimate it. Return: (1) Realistic Range — the low, likely and high outcomes if this runs to judgment, each tied to the specific fact or document that drives it; (2) Anchor — the opening number, plus the three facts we cite alongside it so it reads as reasoned rather than arbitrary; (3) Concession Path — the sequence of numbers we move through, the interval between moves, and what we ask for at each step so no move is free; (4) Walk-Away Point — the figure below which continuing is the better commercial choice, shown as a calculation from the inputs provided (expected recovery, remaining costs, delay, recoverability), with the arithmetic visible; (5) Their Alternative — what the other side gets by not settling, including their cost exposure and any deadline that pressures them; (6) Non-Monetary Terms — what we can trade instead of money (payment timing, confidentiality, scope of release, mutual or one-way, dismissal terms, references), ranked by what it costs us; (7) Risk Flags — anything that would move the range sharply, and the evidence that would resolve it; (8) Client Script — the short explanation the client hears, including the one sentence that frames the walk-away. Facts and figures: [PASTE].
Authority Verification: Does the Citation Support the Proposition?ReportExpertReview / Redline
Act as a verification reviewer. For every authority cited in the passage below, check one thing only: whether the source actually supports the proposition it is cited for. Do not assess whether the argument is persuasive. If you cannot open or confirm a source, say so plainly and mark it Unverified — never infer the content of a case, statute or regulation you have not read. Return: (1) Citation Table — one row per authority: Citation | Proposition it is cited for | Verdict (Supports / Partially supports / Does not support / Unverified); (2) Overstatements — where the proposition goes further than the source, quoting the source language beside the claim; (3) Wrong-Level Errors — dicta cited as holding, a dissent or minority view cited as the rule, a repealed or superseded provision, a first-instance decision presented as settled law; (4) Miscitations — wrong party, year, section, court or reporter, and pin cites that do not point to the passage relied on; (5) Currency Check — anything that may have been overturned, amended, distinguished or restricted since, flagged for manual confirmation together with the exact search a human should run; (6) Unsupported Assertions — legal propositions in the text carrying no citation at all; (7) Fix List — for each problem, the smallest change that repairs it (soften the claim, re-pin the cite, substitute authority, delete the sentence); (8) Sign-Off Verdict — safe to file, needs work, or do not file, in one line with the deciding reason. Passage: [PASTE].
Adverse Authority Sweep: What the Other Side Left OutMemoExpertResearch / Authorities
Act as a reviewer instructed to argue against the document below. Scope: the issue [ISSUE] in [JURISDICTION], on the record as it stands — do not assume facts that are not in the document. Your job is to surface what a diligent opponent or a hostile judge would find and the draft does not address. Where you cannot confirm an authority exists and says what you think it says, mark it Unverified and leave it to a human. Return: (1) Omitted Adverse Authority — cases, statutes, regulations or guidance cutting against the position taken, each with what it holds and precisely why it hurts; (2) Distinguishable versus Fatal — split the above into items we can distinguish (with the distinguishing fact) and items that go to the heart of the argument; (3) Their Best Version — the strongest opposing submission on this issue, written in one or two paragraphs as they would write it, not as a summary; (4) Weak Links — the step in our chain of reasoning that fails first under pressure, and the question that exposes it; (5) Candour Items — authority that in [JURISDICTION] we may be obliged to disclose even though it is against us, flagged for a human to confirm against the local rules rather than asserted; (6) Answers — a short, usable response to each item marked fatal, or an honest statement that there is no good answer; (7) Research Gaps — the searches a human must run to close this out, written as actual queries with the database and date range; (8) Coverage Note — where your review may be incomplete and why. Document: [PASTE].