| name | discovery-summarization |
| title | Discovery Summarization |
| description | Summarizes discovery documents (interrogatories, RFPs, RFAs, depositions, privilege logs) into structured attorney-ready memoranda. Triggers when the user needs to summarize discovery materials, identify key admissions, spot response gaps, cross-reference answers, or prepare a discovery status report. |
| author | CaseMark |
| author_url | https://github.com/CaseMark/skills/tree/main/skills/legal/discovery-summarization |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| version | 0.1.0 |
| execution_mode | open |
| jurisdiction | general |
| practice | litigation |
| language | en |
| tags | ["analysis","memo","summarization","summary"] |
Discovery Summarization
Produce a structured discovery summary that surfaces key findings, identifies gaps, and supports motion practice, settlement, or trial preparation.
Quick Start
- Collect all discovery materials (interrogatories, RFPs, RFAs, deposition excerpts, privilege logs)
- Confirm organizational approach: by discovery type or by legal issue
- Follow the workflow below and deliver the output structure
Workflow
- Review all provided discovery documents
- Extract key facts — admissions, dates, amounts, witness IDs, document references, objections
- Organize by discovery type or legal issue, whichever better serves case strategy
- Cross-reference responses against each other and against pleadings to surface inconsistencies
- Assess completeness; flag deficiencies, evasive answers, and boilerplate objections
Output Structure
Executive Summary
- Discovery conducted (types, dates, volume)
- Top 3–5 significant findings
- Critical gaps or deficiencies
Findings (by Discovery Type or Issue)
Per response:
- Request number + brief description
- Objections raised
- Substantive answer (summarized, not restated)
- Key admissions, witness IDs, or document references
- Cross-references to confirming or contradicting responses
Privilege Log Analysis
- Categories of documents withheld
- Privileges asserted
- Potential challenges to privilege claims
Strategic Assessment
- Admissions supporting or undermining case theories
- Factual disputes requiring resolution
- Recommended follow-up: supplemental discovery, meet-and-confer, motions to compel
- Priority-ranked next steps
Pitfalls and Checks
- Cite by number — e.g., "Interrogatory No. 12"; include page references where available
- Quote verbatim for key admissions — use quotation marks
- Organize thematically (damages, liability, defenses) when more useful than chronological order
- Flag non-compliance — deficient or evasive responses violating discovery obligations
- Note protective-order designations — "Confidential", "AEO"
- — identify both favorable and unfavorable information without advocacy
