What this article is and isn’t
Most prompt lists for lawyers are written by content marketers, not practicing attorneys. They give you a one-line instruction like “summarize this case” and act surprised when the output is unusable. A good prompt names the jurisdiction, the posture, the facts, the authorities, and the output format. The 14 prompts below are organized by task and built that way.
If your focus is brief and motion drafting, the writing-specific sibling article goes deeper: ChatGPT prompts for legal writing. If you want a full picture of where AI fits in a small firm, start with AI for law firms. This article covers the broader catch-all: intake, research scoping, document review, client communication, drafting, and firm operations.
Every prompt below works in ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini. Bracketed placeholders show what to swap in. Read the redaction checklist near the end before you paste anything that touches a real client.
How to use these prompts
Two habits separate prompts that produce usable output from prompts that produce slop. First, give the model context up front: jurisdiction, court or agency, who you represent, the procedural stage. The model has no idea what state you practice in or what your judge is like. Second, give it the record. Paste the operative statute, the relevant facts, and any case you want the model to apply. Asking the model to “find the right cases” is how Mata v. Avianca happened; it will invent citations rather than admit it does not know.
Treat every output as a first draft. You sign your name to the final version, so you read every word, verify every citation, and rewrite anything that does not sound like you.
Intake and conflicts
1. New client intake summary from a transcript
You are a paralegal drafting an intake summary from a client phone call. Below is the call transcript (anonymized of full names; only first names appear). "[PASTE TRANSCRIPT]" Produce: 1. A one-paragraph summary of the matter. 2. A list of facts, in chronological order, with dates as given. 3. A list of parties and their roles. 4. A list of documents the client says exist. 5. A list of follow-up questions I should ask before opening a file. 6. A flag list: anything that suggests a conflict, statute-of-limitations issue, or jurisdictional question I need to confirm. Do not draw legal conclusions. Do not invent facts.
2. Conflicts check question generator
Based on the intake summary below, generate a complete list of names, businesses, and relationships I should run through our conflicts database before opening this matter. "[PASTE INTAKE SUMMARY]" For each item, include the type (current client, adverse party, related entity, witness, expert) and a short note on why it should be checked. Order the list with the most-likely-conflict items at the top.
Research scoping
3. Issue spotting from a fact pattern
You are a senior associate reviewing a fact pattern for issue spotting in [JURISDICTION]. Facts: [PASTE FACTS, NO CLIENT IDENTIFIERS] Identify: 1. The legal issues this fact pattern presents, ranked by importance. 2. The doctrinal area for each (contract, tort, statutory, procedural, etc.). 3. The questions I would need to research before advising. Do not state the law or cite cases. The goal is a research roadmap, not an answer. Flag any issue that looks unusual for the jurisdiction so I can prioritize it.
4. Legal research memo plan
I am about to research the following question for a client memo: "[QUESTION PRESENTED]" Jurisdiction: [STATE/FEDERAL]. Produce a research plan with: 1. The primary sources I should check (statutes, regulations, leading cases). 2. The secondary sources that are most likely to be useful (treatises, ABA practice guides, state bar publications). 3. The terms of art and synonyms I should search. 4. The questions I should answer before drafting the memo. Do not invent citations. If you suggest a treatise or rule, name it precisely so I can verify it exists.
Drafting
5. Motion draft from an outline
You are an experienced litigator drafting a [TYPE OF MOTION] in [STATE/FEDERAL COURT, JURISDICTION]. I represent [PARTY ROLE]. Procedural posture: [ONE OR TWO SENTENCES]. Facts (no client identifiers): [FACT 1] [FACT 2] [FACT 3] Authorities I want cited (citation, jurisdiction, holding I am relying on): [STATUTE OR RULE] [CASE - CITATION - HOLDING] Draft the motion in this order: introduction, statement of facts, legal standard, argument, conclusion. Tone: professional, direct. Do not invent citations. If you need a citation I did not provide, write [CITATION NEEDED] so I can fill it in.
6. Demand letter from a fact pattern
Draft a demand letter on behalf of [CLIENT ROLE] to [RECIPIENT ROLE] in [JURISDICTION]. Facts (no identifying information): [FACT 1] [FACT 2] Damages claimed: [ECONOMIC] [NON-ECONOMIC] [SPECIFIC RELIEF SOUGHT] Tone: firm, professional, no theatrics. I am opening a negotiation, not litigating in the letter. Order: caption, opening paragraph stating who I represent, summary of facts, statement of liability under [APPLICABLE STATUTE OR DOCTRINE], damages itemization, demand and deadline, closing. Do not invent statutes, case law, or medical findings. Use [PLACEHOLDER] for any specific number, date, or citation I did not give you.
7. Discovery request first draft
I represent [PARTY ROLE] in a [TYPE OF MATTER] in [JURISDICTION]. I need a first draft of [INTERROGATORIES / REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION / REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION] directed to [OPPOSING PARTY ROLE]. Issues at stake (no client identifiers): [ISSUE 1] [ISSUE 2] Generate [NUMBER] requests, each addressing a specific issue above. Number them, keep each request to one sentence where possible, and avoid compound requests. Add a short preamble with definitions and instructions appropriate for [JURISDICTION]. Flag any request likely to draw an objection and explain why.
8. Engagement letter from a matter description
Draft an engagement letter for [CLIENT ROLE] for [SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION] in [JURISDICTION]. Fee structure: [HOURLY / FLAT / CONTINGENCY], with rates [HOURLY RATE OR FLAT FEE OR PERCENTAGE]. Specific scope inclusions: [ITEM 1] [ITEM 2] Specific scope exclusions: [EXCLUDED ITEM 1] Required sections: identification of client and firm, scope, fees and billing, retainer or trust account terms, conflict-of-interest acknowledgment, file-retention policy, termination, dispute resolution, signature block. Use plain English where possible. Do not insert jurisdiction-specific terms I did not give you.
Client communication
9. Plain-English status update email
Draft a status update email to [CLIENT ROLE] on [MATTER TYPE]. Updates to include: [UPDATE 1] [UPDATE 2] Next steps: [STEP 1] [STEP 2] Audience: a non-lawyer who is anxious about the case. Tone: calm, specific, no legalese where a normal word works. Length: under 200 words. Close with a clear "what I need from you" if applicable.
10. Difficult-conversation email draft
I need to send [CLIENT ROLE] an email delivering the following news: "[BAD NEWS, e.g. the court denied our motion / the settlement offer is below your floor / a deadline was missed]" Context: [CONTEXT 1] [CONTEXT 2] Draft an email that: 1. Opens with the news directly, not buried. 2. Explains the implications in two short paragraphs. 3. Lays out the available next steps. 4. Closes with a request for a phone or video call to discuss. Tone: direct, empathetic, professional. No filler. No false reassurance.
Document review and discovery
11. Document review checklist for a contract type
I am reviewing a [CONTRACT TYPE, e.g. commercial lease, NDA, employment agreement] for a [CLIENT ROLE] in [JURISDICTION]. Generate a review checklist of the issues to flag and the clauses I should inspect closely. Organize the list by category (e.g. parties and recitals, term and termination, payment terms, indemnification, limitation of liability, dispute resolution, miscellaneous). For each item, include a one-sentence note on what would constitute a problem and what a reasonable position looks like in [JURISDICTION] as of [YEAR]. Do not cite specific cases. Do not invent statutes.
12. Deposition exhibit summary
You are a paralegal summarizing exhibits in advance of a deposition. Below is the document. Anonymized of party names where indicated. "[PASTE DOCUMENT TEXT OR DESCRIPTION]" Produce: 1. A one-paragraph summary of what the document is and what it shows. 2. A bullet list of the most important factual statements in the document, with the page or paragraph reference. 3. A list of questions the deposing attorney should consider asking about the document. 4. A flag list: anything in the document that contradicts or supports specific claims I should match to deposition testimony. Do not interpret the document beyond what the text says.
Firm operations
13. Marketing copy from a practice description
I run a [SOLO / SMALL FIRM] in [CITY, STATE]. We focus on [PRACTICE AREAS]. Our differentiator is [WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT, e.g. trial experience, fixed fees, multilingual staff, rapid turnaround]. Write three short pieces of copy: 1. A 90-word "About the firm" paragraph for the website homepage. 2. Three Google Business Profile post drafts about recent or upcoming legal developments relevant to our practice areas (no specific client matters). 3. Five LinkedIn post ideas for the senior partner, with a short outline for each. Tone: professional, plain-spoken, no buzzwords. No "your trusted partner" or "boutique law firm" language. Avoid generic "we fight for you" claims.
14. Standard operating procedure draft for a recurring task
Draft a written SOP for the following recurring task at our firm: "[TASK, e.g. opening a new personal injury matter, filing a notice of appearance, sending a 30-day pre-litigation letter]" Audience: a paralegal new to the firm. Format: 1. Purpose (one sentence). 2. Trigger (when this SOP runs). 3. Inputs needed. 4. Step-by-step instructions, numbered, in order. 5. Outputs and where they get filed. 6. Quality checks before the SOP is considered complete. 7. Common errors and how to fix them. Use plain English. Avoid passive voice. Do not skip steps that look obvious.
How to adapt these prompts to your matter
Two adjustments turn a generic prompt into one that produces usable output for your specific case.
The first is jurisdiction and posture. Add the state, the court or agency, the procedural stage, and the standard of review. A motion to dismiss in federal court reads differently from one in California state court, and the model writes a better draft when it knows which set of conventions to follow. If your local rules require AI disclosure on filings, add that to the prompt so the model produces the disclosure language for you.
The second is voice. Paste a paragraph of your prior writing into the prompt and add a line: “Match this voice.” The model will pick up your sentence length, your willingness to use contractions, and your preferred level of formality. This is the single fastest way to stop sounding like an LLM in your finished product.
Build a personal prompt library over time. Save your three or four most-used prompts as text snippets in your case-management software or a notes app. Edit them as your style and your practice change. The lawyers getting real leverage out of AI are the ones who refine their prompts every week, not the ones searching for the perfect prompt list once a year.
Before you paste anything: a redaction checklist
This is the section most prompt articles skip or bury. Free-tier ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini may use your inputs to improve their models. Even where they do not, you are sending data outside your firm’s control. The free tiers are appropriate for hypothetical fact patterns and your own writing samples. They are not appropriate for actual client material without redaction.
Before you paste any draft or fact pattern into a public AI tool, strip:
- Client names, opposing party names, and any other party names that could identify the matter.
- Specific dates that, combined with publicly available filings, could identify the matter.
- Account numbers, social security numbers, medical record numbers, settlement figures, and any number tied to a specific person.
- Privileged communications and attorney work product the model is not actively drafting from.
- Anything subject to a protective order or sealed filing.
If the matter cannot be meaningfully anonymized, use a tier of the tool where the vendor contractually agrees not to train on your inputs. Examples include ChatGPT Enterprise, Claude for Work, and Microsoft Copilot for Business inside the Microsoft 365 tenancy. Run anything truly sensitive on a local model on your own hardware, or do not run it through AI at all.
The ABA addressed lawyer use of generative AI in Formal Opinion 512 (July 2024), which folds AI use into existing duties of competence (Rule 1.1) and confidentiality (Rule 1.6). Several state bars have followed with their own guidance. A growing number of judges require an AI disclosure in filings; Mata v. Avianca is the cautionary tale on what happens when a lawyer skips citation verification.
Related on Business AI Workflows
- ChatGPT prompts for legal writing goes deep on briefs, motions, demand letters, and edit passes.
- ChatGPT prompts for contract review covers redlining, clause comparison, and risk flagging.
- AI for law firms is the pillar guide that maps the full cluster.
None of this is legal advice. Verify every citation, follow your state bar’s guidance, and check your local court’s standing orders on AI disclosure before you file.
