| name | case-viability-report |
| title | Case Viability & Conflict Check Report |
| description | Produces internal case viability and conflict check memos for personal injury litigation intake. Screens conflicts, assesses liability and damages, checks statute of limitations, and outputs an accept/decline recommendation. Use when evaluating new PI intake, running conflict checks, assessing case merit pre-filing, or preparing acceptance memos. |
| author | CaseMark |
| author_url | https://github.com/CaseMark/skills/tree/main/skills/legal/case-viability-report |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| version | 0.1.0 |
| execution_mode | open |
| jurisdiction | us |
| practice | personal-injury |
| language | en |
Case Viability & Conflict Check Report
Internal privileged memo evaluating a prospective PI matter for case acceptance, conflict clearance, and resource commitment.
Prerequisites
- Intake summary — client name, adverse parties, incident date, injuries, objectives
- Supporting documents — police reports, medical records, photos, insurance info
- Firm conflict database — current/former clients, pending matters
- Fee parameters — contingency rates, cost-advance policy, minimum case value thresholds
Quick Start
- Gather intake summary and supporting documents
- Run conflict screen against all parties and entities
- Assess legal viability: claims, defenses, SOL, procedural bars
- Project damages and calculate cost-benefit
- Issue recommendation: ACCEPT / ACCEPT WITH CONDITIONS / DECLINE / DEFER
- Draft executive summary with privilege designation
Memo Sections
1. Factual Summary
- Chronological narrative of key events
- All parties identified (client, adverse parties, insurers, witnesses, related entities)
- Client's stated objectives
- Gap analysis:
| Missing Information | Impact (H/M/L) | Resolution Path |
|---|
| {item} | {level} | {method} |
2. Conflict of Interest Analysis
Screen every person/entity against firm databases.
Check: prospective client + affiliates, all adverse parties (named and anticipated), insurers/adjusters, key witnesses, subject matter overlap.
For each conflict found:
| Factor | Analysis |
|---|
| Type | Direct (Rule 1.7) / Former client (Rule 1.9) / Imputed (Rule 1.10) / Prospective (Rule 1.18) |
| Affected matter | {identify specifically} |
| Waivable? | Yes — informed written consent / No — {reason} |
| Proposed cure | Screening wall / Client consent / Decline |
If clear: state affirmatively with search date range and scope. Flag jurisdiction-specific RPC variations with [VERIFY].
3. Legal Viability
A. Causes of Action — For each claim, table elements vs. supporting/undermining facts and available evidence.
