skills/legal/appellate-formatting/SKILL.md
Generates appellate-filing-ready Tables of Contents, Tables of Authorities, and Certificates of Compliance under FRAP 32(g) and related rules. Produces defensible word-count calculations with transparent exclusions and anti-hallucination guardrails for pagination and citations. Covers federal circuits, state appellate courts, and U.S. Supreme Court variations. Use when building TOC, TOA, compliance certificates, formatting briefs for filing, or when the user mentions word count calculation, FRAP 32 compliance, appellate brief assembly, or page numbering.
npx skillsauth add casemark/skills appellate-formattingInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Produces TOCs, TOAs, and Certificates of Compliance with accuracy guarantees and transparent placeholders where verification is required. The primary risk in AI-assisted appellate formatting is hallucinated page numbers and citations — use [__] placeholders aggressively rather than guessing.
Gather before drafting (unless user says "use defaults"):
Defaults (if user doesn't specify): FRAP 32 federal circuit rules; proportional 14-pt font; [__] page placeholders; word count marked as estimate.
Stop and ask if forum, brief type, or formatting details are missing — certificate language, limits, and exclusions depend on these.
| Forum | Primary Rules | Certificate Rule | Notes | |-------|--------------|-----------------|-------| | Federal (FRAP) | FRAP 28, 32 | FRAP 32(g) | Verify current word limits | | U.S. Supreme Court | Rules 33, 34 | Rule 33.1(g) / 33.2 | Booklet vs. letter have different limit types | | State appellate | Varies | Varies | Do NOT assume state rules mirror FRAP |
FRAP type-volume limits (verify current):
| Document Type | Word Limit | |--------------|------------| | Principal brief (opening/response) | 13,000 | | Reply brief | 6,500 | | Amicus brief (FRAP 29) | Verify per rule |
Pagination:
[__] placeholders, label: "DRAFT—PAGE NUMBERS TO BE UPDATED AFTER PAGINATION"Template:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ................. i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ........................... ii
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ...................... 1
STATEMENT OF ISSUES ............................ 2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE .......................... 3
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ............................ 10
ARGUMENT ....................................... 12
I. [Point Heading Verbatim] .................. 12
A. [Subheading Verbatim] .................. 12
B. [Subheading Verbatim] .................. 14
II. [Point Heading Verbatim] .................. 18
CONCLUSION ..................................... 30
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ...................... 31
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ......................... 32
Parse all citations from brief text. Validate each actually appears on listed pages.
Categories (in order):
| Category | Sort Order | |----------|-----------| | Cases | Alphabetical by first party name | | Constitutional Provisions | By article/amendment | | Statutes | By code and section number | | Rules | By rule number | | Other Authorities | Alphabetical by author/title |
Rules:
[Citation appears incomplete; verify reporter and year]Template:
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases Page(s)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.,
477 U.S. 242 (1986) ............................ 14, 16
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,
477 U.S. 317 (1986) ............................ 14
Statutes
28 U.S.C. § 1291 ................................. 1
42 U.S.C. § 1983 ................................. 3, 7, 14
Rules
Fed. R. App. P. 28 ............................... 1
Fed. R. App. P. 32 ............................... 31
Other Authorities
16A Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice
& Procedure § 3949 (5th ed. 2020) .............. 15
Bifurcated count:
Total Words (entire document): [X]
− Excluded per FRAP 32(f): [Y]
- Cover, Disclosure, TOC, TOA
- Appearance of counsel, Signature block
- Certificate of Compliance/Service
- Addendum (statutes/rules/regulations)
= Net Words for Compliance: [Z]
Rules:
FRAP 32(g) certificate template:
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 32(g)(1), I certify that this brief complies
with the type-volume limitation of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B) because
this brief contains [____] words, excluding the parts of the brief
exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(f).
This brief also complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P.
32(a)(5) and the type-style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6)
because it has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using
[Software Name] in [Font Size]-point [Font Name].
_____________________________
[Attorney Name]
- [ ] Every TOC heading matches body heading verbatim
- [ ] Every TOA authority appears on listed pages
- [ ] Certificate word count matches final document count
- [ ] Caption, case number, party names consistent throughout
- [ ] Font/margins uniform (including footnotes if required)
- [ ] Front matter: Roman numerals; body: Arabic numerals
- [ ] No orphaned headers at page bottoms
- [ ] PDF text-searchable with bookmarks (if required)
- [ ] TOA page numbers not shifted by TOA insertion
- [ ] Certificate cites correct rule subsections for current year
After delivery, confirm with user:
State: "Generated based on [Federal/State] rules for [Specific Circuit/Court]. All word counts, page numbers, and citations must be independently verified before filing."
| Jurisdiction | Key Variation | |-------------|--------------| | 5th & 11th Circuits | Certificate of Interested Persons (CIP) required before TOC | | 9th Circuit | Statement of Related Cases often excluded from word count | | California (Rule 8.204) | 14,000-word limit for principal brief; different attachment rules [VERIFY] | | U.S. Supreme Court | Booklet (Rule 33.1) vs. letter (Rule 33.2) — different limit types | | State courts generally | May use page limits, different fonts/margins, separate word-count affidavits |
[VERIFY] or [__] placeholdersdevelopment
name: automated-contract-summary language: en description: Generates structured executive summaries of contracts using ML — captures key terms, party obligations, risk allocations, and compliance requirements in a standardized format. Optimized for high-volume review where speed and consistency matter. tags: - summarization - agreement - corporate --- # Automated Contract Summarization Produces standardized executive summaries of contracts using machine learning, capturing essential term
tools
Extracts regulatory obligations from dense regulations across jurisdictions. Breaks down multi-level regulations into clear article-level obligations, classifies applicability to a business, and prioritizes by risk level. Use when translating regulations into actionable compliance requirements.
development
Continuously monitors regulatory landscapes for changes relevant to a specific business. Ingests global regulatory updates, filters by relevance, summarizes impact, and produces an actionable change advisory. Use when tracking regulatory developments affecting a particular product or market.
testing
Compares an organization's existing compliance controls, policies, and procedures against extracted regulatory obligations to identify coverage gaps. Produces a remediation plan with prioritized actions. Use when assessing compliance maturity or preparing for regulatory audits.