legal-memo

name	legal-memo
title	Legal Memorandum
description	Drafts U.S. internal legal memoranda using IRAC structure to analyze issues, synthesize authority, assess risks, and recommend strategy. Use when asked to draft a research memo, internal memo, issue analysis, case strategy memo, or any IRAC-based legal analysis.
author	CaseMark
author_url	https://github.com/CaseMark/skills/tree/main/skills/legal/legal-memo
license	Apache-2.0
version	0.1.0
execution_mode	open
jurisdiction	us
practice	litigation
language	en

Legal Memorandum

Produces an objective, litigation-focused internal memo that answers a legal question and informs strategy. Uses IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) throughout the Discussion section.

Prerequisites

Gather before drafting:

1. Issue statement — single, answerable legal question with jurisdiction and party posture
2. Jurisdiction — controlling court/forum and choice-of-law constraints
3. Key facts — chronology; label disputed, undisputed, and unknown facts
4. Record sources — pleadings, contracts, statutes, evidence, prior research
5. Audience/purpose — partner review, motion strategy, risk assessment, or settlement posture

Memo Structure

Section	Requirements
Heading	To / From / Date / Re / Jurisdiction; confidentiality note if needed
Question Presented	One legally precise sentence; frame for yes/no or short answer
Brief Answer	2–4 sentences: likely outcome + key drivers
Facts	Objective summary; label disputed and missing facts
Discussion	IRAC per issue: Rule → Application → Counterarguments → Conclusion
Risk & Strategy	Likelihood ranges, exposure, procedural constraints, next steps
Conclusion	Direct answer + actionable recommendation
Appendix (optional)	Authority table, issue tree, or research log

Core Workflow

1. Research and validate authority

• Identify controlling statutes, regulations, and binding precedent.
• Capture persuasive authority when binding law is thin or split.
• Verify current validity (overruled, superseded, amended).
• Note jurisdictional splits or unresolved conflicts.
• Cite in Bluebook format throughout.

2. Draft Discussion using IRAC

For each issue:

• Rule — synthesize holdings from binding authority; note majority/minority positions.
• Application — apply rules to case facts; address each element.
• Counterarguments — present opposing interpretations; distinguish unfavorable authority.
• — state likely outcome for this issue.