Litigation legal-AI skills in General

253 legal AI skills for litigation in General.

Proposition checking

Apache-2.0GeneralLitigation

Use when users say "does this authority support the point", "check propositions", "fact-check this argument", "verify record support", or need cited cases, statutes, exhibits, transcripts, emails, or pleadings checked against legal or factual propositions.

Quashing Petition Drafter

MITGeneralLitigation

Assesses and drafts Indian petitions to quash criminal proceedings, including maintainability, grounds, interim relief and annexures. Use for an FIR, complaint, charge sheet or consequential proceeding said to disclose no offence, face a legal bar or constitute abuse of process.

Real-Time Trial Assist API

MITGeneralLitigation

Use during an active trial or arbitration hearing to provide live support to counsel at the counsel table. Detects witness contradictions against prior depositions and statements in real time, surfaces suggested cross-examination follow-up questions, fact-checks opposing counsel's legal propositions, and retrieves relevant documents within a 1–3 second latency budget. Designed for DIFC, ADGM, international arbitration, UK, and US trial settings.

Recovery Strategy Planner

MITGeneralLitigation

Compares and sequences lawful recovery routes for a defaulted financial exposure, collateral and obligor group. Use for demand, negotiation, litigation, security enforcement, guarantees, insolvency, asset preservation or settlement strategy.

Redaction Reviewer

MITGeneralLitigation

Reviews proposed or completed legal redactions for an identified disclosure, filing, publication, investigation, or information-access process. Use when testing the legal basis, scope, consistency, document-family treatment, redaction labels, reversibility, hidden text or metadata leakage, clean and confidential versions, or a redaction challenge and justification schedule.

Related Party Analyst (India)

MITGeneralLitigation

Determines whether persons, entities, relationships, and transactions are related-party matters for an Indian company and maps audit committee, board, shareholder, abstention, disclosure, register, financial-reporting, and listed-entity requirements. Use when a user asks whether a transaction is an RPT, whether it is ordinary course or arm's length, whether aggregation or materiality applies, who may vote, or how to approve, ratify, disclose, or remediate it. Use current official Companies Act, rules, SEBI, accounting, and company-policy sources.

RERA Compliance Checker

MITGeneralLitigation

Checks RERA registration and disclosure obligations for a real estate project — registration threshold applicability, promoter disclosure duties, agreement-for-sale compliance, delay-consequence terms against the statutory framework, and escrow fund-utilization requirements — always confirming which state's RERA authority and rules apply first, since implementation is state-wise, not uniform. Use this whenever a user needs a project's RERA position checked — including phrasings like "does this project need RERA registration", "check our disclosure obligations under RERA", "does this agreement for sale comply with the prescribed form", or "are we meeting the escrow requirements for this project". India-specific. Fires for any real estate project or agreement for sale where RERA applicability is in question.

Resolution Plan Reviewer

MITGeneralLitigation

Reviews Indian corporate resolution plans for eligibility, statutory compliance, distributions, feasibility, approvals and implementation risk. Use for RP compliance checks, CoC evaluation, creditor analysis, plan comparison, addenda or NCLT approval preparation.

Restructuring Documenter

MITGeneralLitigation

Creates the legal implementation plan and document trail for corporate restructurings, including entity simplification, share or asset transfers, mergers, demergers, conversions, capital changes, debt reorganisations, intragroup transfers, management changes, and wind-down steps. Use when a user needs an alternatives map, approval matrix, step plan, dependency schedule, document list, closing set, or post-closing record. Use for documenting an agreed or proposed restructuring, not insolvency advice or a standalone tax opinion.

SARFAESI Advisor

MITGeneralLitigation

Assesses and plans Indian secured-creditor enforcement under the SARFAESI Act and Security Interest Enforcement Rules. Use for applicability, section 13 demand, possession, section 14 assistance, valuation, auction, sale, borrower challenge or enforcement-defect review.

Secretarial Compliance Checker (India)

MITGeneralLitigation

Checks recurring and event-based secretarial, governance, register, meeting, beneficial-ownership, share-capital, accounts, audit, charge, director, key-managerial-personnel, and MCA filing obligations for an Indian company. Use when a user needs a company-law compliance calendar, filing audit, statutory-register review, missed-deadline assessment, annual compliance check, or remediation plan. Use current official Companies Act, rules, notifications, MCA forms and instructions, and applicable ICSI Secretarial Standards because forms, exemptions, thresholds, and due dates change.

Securities Compliance Checker

MITGeneralLitigation

Maps current Indian securities-law approvals, eligibility, pricing, disclosures, filings and timelines for an issue or transaction. Use for public, rights, preferential, private-placement, debt, takeover, buyback, listing or listed-company capital actions.

Settlement Agreement

MITGeneralLitigation

Use when parties to a dispute need to draft a settlement agreement resolving pending or threatened litigation or arbitration. Covers settlement amount, payment terms, mutual releases, confidentiality, non-disparagement, and dismissal of claims. MENA-specific guidance on release enforceability under UAE civil law, waqf from liability under Lebanese law, confidentiality limitations in KSA court proceedings, and Arabic-language execution requirements.

Settlement Agreement

MITGeneralLitigation

Use when drafting a settlement agreement, release, or deed of settlement to resolve an existing or threatened dispute. Covers payment terms, release scope, confidentiality, non-disparagement, and dismissal mechanics across civil-law and common-law jurisdictions including UAE, DIFC, KSA, LB, UK, and EU. Flags non-waivable statutory rights, tax characterization, and the rule that bilateral releases always require dual counsel sign-off before execution.

Settlement Agreement Template

MITGeneralLitigation

Use when a law firm or legal team needs a reusable settlement agreement template with bracketed placeholders for repeated use across multiple matters. Produces a fully structured template with representations, mutual releases, confidentiality, non-disparagement, and dismissal mechanics, ready to be populated for specific disputes. Distinguish from prompt-pack-settlement-agreement, which targets a specific dispute; this skill produces the reusable master template.

Settlement Documenter

MITGeneralLitigation

Documents the outcome of a settlement process in one of two distinct modes — a contemporaneous session record of what was actually agreed and what remains open (mediation, conciliation, or negotiation session), or the complete, executable, binding settlement instrument once terms are agreed (heads of settlement, mediated or conciliated settlement agreement, consent terms, full and final settlement). Use for "record what we agreed today", "document the outcome of this session", "draft the full settlement agreement now that we've agreed terms", or "turn this agreement-in-principle into heads of settlement". The session record is never treated as the binding document unless the user explicitly confirms that is intended. Distinct from conciliation-proposal-drafter or settlement-evaluator, which operate before agreement exists. Fires after any settlement session or once settlement terms are agreed, in mediation, conciliation, or direct negotiation.

Settlement Evaluator

MITGeneralLitigation

Tests a specific settlement offer against the realistic alternative of continuing to litigate — an expected-value comparison with the arithmetic shown, layered with what pure expected value misses — certainty, the client's actual risk tolerance, and hidden costs in the offer's own conditions. Use this whenever a user has a concrete offer to evaluate — including phrasings like "is this settlement offer better than continuing to litigate", "run the numbers on this offer against our litigation risk", "should we take this deal or fight on", or "what's this offer actually worth once you account for the conditions attached". Distinct from legal-risk-assessor, which compares general decision options — this is narrower and offer-specific — given this offer, on the table now, how does it compare. Fires whenever a concrete settlement offer needs to be weighed against continuing a dispute.

Settlement Proposals Summary

Apache-2.0GeneralLitigation

Produces chronological settlement negotiation summaries from litigation case files, extracting proposals, counteroffers, payment structures, release provisions, and confidentiality terms. Includes trial-risk evaluation and comparable settlement benchmarking. Use when summarizing settlement history, preparing for mediation, documenting negotiation progression, or creating settlement status reports.

Settlement Strategy Planner

MITGeneralLitigation

Builds a settlement negotiation strategy before any offer is on the table — BATNA and WATNA for both sides, an opening-to-walkaway negotiation range, litigation economics (cost and time to a result versus settling now), non-monetary terms worth trading, negotiating authority, and the sequencing of concessions. Use this whenever a user wants to prepare for settlement negotiations generally, not evaluate one specific offer — including phrasings like "what's our BATNA here", "build our settlement negotiating range", "what should we open with and where's our walkaway", "map out how we should sequence concessions in this negotiation", or "prepare our settlement strategy before talks start". Distinct from settlement-evaluator, which tests one specific offer already on the table against continuing to litigate — this builds the strategy before an offer exists. Fires ahead of any settlement negotiation, mediation, or conciliation, ahead of or independent of any concrete offer.

Settlement Summarization

Apache-2.0GeneralLitigation

Summarizes settlement negotiations and agreements in litigation. Extracts key terms, payment structures, release provisions, negotiation chronology, and compliance obligations for both two-party and complex multi-party settlements. Use when the user needs a settlement summary, settlement analysis, negotiation history, or settlement term review.

Settlement Summary

Apache-2.0GeneralLitigation

Generates structured summaries of settlement negotiations and agreements in commercial litigation. Use when summarizing settlement history, documenting negotiation timelines, analyzing settlement terms, preparing implementation checklists, or reviewing release and confidentiality provisions.

Settlement vs. Trial EV Calculator — Should You Take the Offer?

MITGeneralLitigation

Use when an attorney or client needs to compare the expected value of accepting a settlement offer against the expected value of proceeding to trial — incorporating P(win), damages range, costs to trial, loser-pays rules, discount rate, and strategic or reputational factors. Produces an EV comparison (trial vs. settlement), a recommendation (take/counter/decline), and a sensitivity analysis showing which assumptions matter most. Always disclaimed as a probabilistic estimate. Always paired with the outcome probability estimator.

skill-evidenceops

MITGeneralLitigation

Forensic media triage with chain of custody.

Skill：合法自证与承认事实提问设计

MITGeneralLitigation

Designs legally compliant, strategically ordered questions to elicit admissions or expose contradictions from opposing parties in chats, calls, mediation, or court. Use when you need to confirm key facts, narrow disputes, or build an evidentiary record through structured questioning.