| name | leg - Legal Reasoning |
| description | Apply structured legal thinking to a situation. Identifies relevant legal domains, analyzes facts against rules, and surfaces risks and obligations. |
| output | {"format":"prose"} |
Legal Reasoning
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Disclaimer: This is a structured thinking exercise, not legal advice. It does not create an attorney-client relationship. For actual legal matters, consult a qualified attorney in the relevant jurisdiction.
Step 1: Identify the Legal Domain
Legal issues rarely live in a single domain. Map all that apply.
PRIMARY DOMAIN: [contract / tort / employment / IP / regulatory / criminal / property / corporate / tax / privacy / other]
RELATED DOMAINS:
- [domain] — because: [connection]
- [domain] — because: [connection]
JURISDICTION(S): [where does this take place? federal/state/country]
CROSS-JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES: [any conflicts of law?]
Step 2: Find Relevant Rules
Identify the legal rules, statutes, regulations, or principles that apply.
APPLICABLE RULES:
1. [rule/statute/regulation] — Source: [where it comes from]
Key provision: [the specific language that matters]
2. [rule/statute/regulation] — Source: [where it comes from]
Key provision: [the specific language that matters]
APPLICABLE STANDARDS:
- [standard of proof / standard of care / standard of review]
KEY DEFINITIONS:
- [legal term]: [how the law defines it in this context]
Step 3: Analyze Facts Against Rules
Apply the rules to the specific situation.
FACT PATTERN:
- [relevant fact 1]
- [relevant fact 2]
- [relevant fact 3]
ANALYSIS:
For each rule, assess:
1. [Rule 1]: [How do the facts satisfy or fail to satisfy each element?]
- Element A: [met / not met / unclear] — because: [reason]
- Element B: [met / not met / unclear] — because: [reason]
FACTS THAT ARE DISPUTED OR UNKNOWN:
- [fact] — Impact if true: [X] / Impact if false: [Y]
Step 4: Identify Risks and Obligations
OBLIGATIONS (things you must do):
1. [obligation] — Source: [rule/contract/regulation] — Deadline: [if any]
2. [obligation] — Source: [rule/contract/regulation] — Deadline: [if any]
RISKS:
| Risk | Likelihood | Severity | Basis |
|------|-----------|----------|-------|
| [risk 1] | Low/Med/High | Low/Med/High | [legal basis] |
| [risk 2] | Low/Med/High | Low/Med/High | [legal basis] |
EXPOSURE: [what is the worst-case outcome?]
Step 5: Assess Enforceability
Not every legal right is practically enforceable.
ENFORCEABILITY FACTORS:
- [ ] Is there a clear legal basis?
- [ ] Is there a forum (court, arbitration, agency) to bring a claim?
- [ ] Is there a statute of limitations issue?
- [ ] Are damages provable?
- [ ] Is the opposing party reachable and solvent?
- [ ] Is enforcement cost-effective relative to the stakes?
PRACTICAL ENFORCEABILITY: [Strong / Moderate / Weak / Impractical]
REASON: [brief explanation]
Step 6: Recommend Actions
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
1. [action] — Priority: [high/med/low] — Timeline: [when]
Rationale: [why this matters legally]
2. [action] — Priority: [high/med/low] — Timeline: [when]
Rationale: [why this matters legally]
ESCALATION TRIGGERS (consult an attorney if):
- [trigger condition]
- [trigger condition]
DOCUMENTATION TO PRESERVE:
- [document/evidence to keep]
- [document/evidence to keep]
Reminder: This analysis identifies legal dimensions for structured thinking. It is not a substitute for professional legal counsel.
Integration
Use with:
/ctan -> Analyze a specific contract in detail/rgc -> Assess regulatory compliance obligations/rtas -> Evaluate rights of all parties involved
