brycewang-stanford/legal-research-guide
skills/43-wentorai-research-plugins/skills/domains/law/legal-research-guide/SKILL.md
Legal research methods, case law analysis, and compliance tools
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research legal-research-guideInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Apr 19, 2026, 1:22 PM144.3s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- legal-research-guide
- description:
- Legal research methods, case law analysis, and compliance tools
- emoji:
- ⚖️
- category:
- domains
- subcategory:
- law
- keywords:
- ["law", "jurisprudence", "case law", "compliance analysis"]
- source:
- wentor-research-plugins
Legal Research Guide
Conduct systematic legal research across jurisdictions, analyze case law, navigate statutory frameworks, and use computational legal tools for academic and practice-oriented research.
Legal Research Frameworks
IRAC Method
The standard analytical framework for legal reasoning:
| Step | Description | Example | |------|-------------|---------| | Issue | Identify the legal question | "Does web scraping of public data constitute a CFAA violation?" | | Rule | State the applicable legal rule | "The CFAA prohibits accessing a computer 'without authorization' or 'exceeding authorized access'" | | Application | Apply the rule to the facts | "In hiQ v. LinkedIn, the 9th Circuit held that scraping publicly available data does not violate the CFAA..." | | Conclusion | State the legal conclusion | "Therefore, scraping publicly available academic data likely does not violate the CFAA, though terms-of-service issues remain." |
CREAC Method (For Academic Legal Writing)
C - Conclusion (state your thesis)
R - Rule (present the legal rule with authority)
E - Explanation (analyze how courts have interpreted the rule)
A - Application (apply the rule to your specific scenario)
C - Conclusion (restate and refine conclusion)
Legal Research Databases
Primary Sources
| Database | Coverage | Cost | Best For | |----------|----------|------|----------| | Westlaw (Thomson Reuters) | US, UK, EU, international | Subscription | Comprehensive case law, KeyCite citator | | LexisNexis | US, UK, international | Subscription | News integration, Shepard's citator | | Google Scholar (Case Law) | US federal and state courts | Free | Quick case lookup, citation tracking | | Casetext / CoCounsel | US courts | Subscription | AI-powered legal research | | CourtListener | US federal courts | Free | PACER alternative, bulk data | | EUR-Lex | EU law | Free | EU legislation, CJEU case law | | BAILII | UK, Ireland | Free | UK case law and legislation | | Justia | US law | Free | US case law, statutes, regulations | | HeinOnline | Historical legal materials | Subscription | Law journals, treaties, legislative history |
Secondary Sources
| Source | Content | Use | |--------|---------|-----| | Law reviews / journals | Scholarly analysis | Academic research, policy arguments | | Restatements | ALI compilations of common law | Authoritative secondary source | | Treatises | Comprehensive subject coverage | Deep dive into specific areas | | Legal encyclopedias (AmJur, CJS) | Broad legal summaries | Starting point for unfamiliar areas | | Practice guides | Practical how-to | Practitioner-oriented research |
Citation Systems
Bluebook (US Standard)
# Case citation
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803).
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 495 (1954).
# Statute citation
42 U.S.C. Section 1983 (2018).
Cal. Civ. Code Section 1798.100 (West 2020). # California statute
# Law review article
Jane Smith, The Future of AI Regulation, 120 Harv. L. Rev. 456 (2024).
# Book
Richard Posner, Economic Analysis of Law 25 (9th ed. 2014).
# Short form citations (after first full citation)
Brown, 347 U.S. at 495.
Smith, supra note 12, at 460.
Id. at 462. # Same source as immediately preceding citation
OSCOLA (UK/Oxford Standard)
# Case citation
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 (HL).
R v Brown [1994] 1 AC 212, 237 (HL).
# Statute citation
Human Rights Act 1998, s 3.
Data Protection Act 2018, s 170(1).
# Journal article
Jane Smith, 'The Future of AI Regulation' (2024) 120 Modern Law Review 456.
# Book
Richard Posner, Economic Analysis of Law (9th edn, Aspen 2014) 25.
Computational Legal Research
Case Law Analysis with Python
import requests
import json
# Using the CourtListener API (free, open-source)
BASE_URL = "https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v3"
def search_opinions(query, court="scotus", page_size=20):
"""Search case opinions via CourtListener API."""
response = requests.get(
f"{BASE_URL}/search/",
params={
"q": query,
"type": "o", # opinions
"court": court,
"page_size": page_size,
"order_by": "score desc"
},
headers={"Authorization": "Token YOUR_API_TOKEN"}
)
results = response.json()
for case in results.get("results", []):
print(f"[{case.get('dateFiled', 'N/A')}] {case.get('caseName', 'N/A')}")
print(f" Court: {case.get('court', 'N/A')}")
print(f" Citation: {case.get('citation', ['N/A'])[0] if case.get('citation') else 'N/A'}")
print(f" URL: https://www.courtlistener.com{case.get('absolute_url', '')}")
return results
# Search for AI-related Supreme Court cases
results = search_opinions("artificial intelligence", court="scotus")
Citation Network Analysis
import networkx as nx
def build_citation_network(seed_case_ids, depth=2):
"""Build a citation network starting from seed cases."""
G = nx.DiGraph()
visited = set()
queue = [(cid, 0) for cid in seed_case_ids]
while queue:
case_id, level = queue.pop(0)
if case_id in visited or level > depth:
continue
visited.add(case_id)
# Get case metadata and citations
resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/opinions/{case_id}/",
headers={"Authorization": "Token YOUR_API_TOKEN"})
if resp.status_code != 200:
continue
case = resp.json()
case_name = case.get("case_name", f"Case {case_id}")
G.add_node(case_id, name=case_name, date=case.get("date_filed"))
# Get citing opinions (who cites this case)
for cited_id in case.get("opinions_cited", []):
G.add_edge(case_id, cited_id)
if level < depth:
queue.append((cited_id, level + 1))
return G
# Analyze: which cases are most cited (highest in-degree)?
# These are the most authoritative precedents
Statutory Text Analysis
# Analyzing legislative text complexity
import re
from textstat import textstat
def analyze_statute(text):
"""Compute readability metrics for statutory text."""
return {
"flesch_reading_ease": textstat.flesch_reading_ease(text),
"flesch_kincaid_grade": textstat.flesch_kincaid_grade(text),
"gunning_fog": textstat.gunning_fog(text),
"word_count": textstat.lexicon_count(text),
"sentence_count": textstat.sentence_count(text),
"avg_sentence_length": textstat.avg_sentence_length(text),
"defined_terms": len(re.findall(r'"[A-Z][^"]*"', text)),
"cross_references": len(re.findall(r'[Ss]ection \d+', text))
}
# Example: Analyze a section of the GDPR
gdpr_article_5 = """
Personal data shall be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent
manner in relation to the data subject; collected for specified, explicit
and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is
incompatible with those purposes; adequate, relevant and limited to what
is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are processed.
"""
print(analyze_statute(gdpr_article_5))
Research Areas in Law
| Area | Key Topics | Interdisciplinary Connections | |------|-----------|------------------------------| | AI & Law | Algorithmic fairness, liability for autonomous systems, AI regulation | CS, philosophy | | IP Law | Patent, copyright, trade secret, open source licensing | Engineering, business | | Privacy Law | GDPR, CCPA, surveillance, data protection | CS, political science | | Law & Economics | Efficiency analysis of legal rules, behavioral law & economics | Economics | | Comparative Law | Cross-jurisdictional analysis, legal transplants | Political science | | International Law | Treaties, humanitarian law, trade law | International relations | | Environmental Law | Climate litigation, ESG regulation, environmental justice | Environmental science | | Health Law | Clinical trial regulation, health data, bioethics | Medicine, public health |
Practical Research Workflow
- Frame the legal question using IRAC or CREAC structure
- Search secondary sources first (treatises, law reviews) for background
- Identify governing law (federal vs. state, statutory vs. common law)
- Find controlling authority (binding precedent in your jurisdiction)
- Shepardize / KeyCite every case to ensure it is still good law
- Analyze and synthesize cases by extracting rules, holdings, and reasoning
- Consider policy arguments drawing on law and economics, empirical legal studies, or comparative law perspectives
- Update regularly as law changes frequently (set up alerts on Westlaw/Lexis)
Top Academic Venues
| Journal | Rank | Focus | |---------|------|-------| | Harvard Law Review | T1 | General | | Yale Law Journal | T1 | General | | Stanford Law Review | T1 | General, tech law | | Columbia Law Review | T1 | General | | Journal of Legal Studies | T1 | Law & economics | | Journal of Empirical Legal Studies | T1 | Empirical methods | | Computer Law & Security Review | Field | Technology law | | Berkeley Technology Law Journal | Field | Tech, IP |
Related Skills
brycewang-stanford/thematic-analysis
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Conduct rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/slr-prisma
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/running-placebo-analysis
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Performs placebo-in-time sensitivity analysis with hierarchical null model and optional Bayesian assurance. Use when checking model robustness, verifying lack of pre-intervention effects, or estimating study power.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/running-causalpy-experiments
data-ai
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Fit, summarize, plot, and interpret a chosen CausalPy experiment. Use after the causal method has been selected, including when configuring PyMC/sklearn models and scale-aware custom priors.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026