casemark/discovery-document-summaries

Discovery Document Summaries

Compresses voluminous discovery productions into strategically focused summaries with Bates-cited facts, impeachment opportunities, and privilege alerts.

Prerequisites

• Discovery documents — depositions, emails, contracts, interrogatories, medical/financial records
• Case context — operative claims, defenses, key disputed issues
• Production identifiers — Bates ranges or document control numbers
• (Optional) Protective order designations — confidentiality tiers

Quick Start

1. Gather case context and identify disputed issues to focus analysis
2. Review documents using the extraction priorities below
3. Produce an executive overview + per-document entries
4. Close with gaps and follow-up recommendations

Executive Overview

| Field | Content | |---|---| | Volume reviewed | Total pages / document count | | Date range | Earliest to latest document date | | Document categories | Depositions, emails, contracts, records, etc. | | Key findings | Top 3–5 most significant evidentiary items |

Per-Document Entry Format

Document ID:     [Bates No. / production identifier]
Date:            [Document date]
Author/Parties:  [Author → Recipient, or contracting parties]
Type:            [Email / Deposition / Contract / Record / etc.]
Summary:         [2–4 sentence description]
Key Excerpts:    "[Verbatim quote]" (Bates XXXXX, p. X)
Legal Relevance: [Claim/defense element addressed]
Flags:           [⚑ Impeachment | ⚐ Privilege | ★ Exhibit candidate | ↔ Inconsistency]

Deposition-specific additions:

• Inconsistencies — prior testimony or documents contradicting this testimony (cite both)
• Evasions — verbatim Q&A of avoided/unclear answers with page/line cite
• Credibility — strong/weak moments with page/line reference

Extraction Priorities

Extract in this order:

1. Admissions and denials on disputed facts
2. Intent/knowledge evidence — awareness of risk, obligation, or wrongdoing
3. Timeline anchors — dates establishing sequence or notice
4. Chain of custody / authentication facts
5. Contradiction material — conflicts between documents or witnesses
6. Damages evidence — amounts, loss calculations, financial impact

Organization Options

| Method | Best for | |---|---| | By document type | Large mixed productions | | Chronological | Fraud, breach, narrative-heavy cases | | By legal issue | Complex multi-count complaints | | By witness | Deposition-heavy phases |

Closing: Gaps and Follow-Up

• Evidentiary gaps — documents referenced but not produced
• Additional discovery — suggested RFPs, interrogatories, deposition topics
• Privilege log — entries worth challenging or monitoring

Rules

• Cite everything — every fact must reference a Bates number; never assert unattributed facts
• Quote verbatim for key excerpts; use quotation marks and page/line for all direct quotes
• Flag privilege — do not summarize potentially privileged content; flag for attorney review
• Flag confidentiality — note CONFIDENTIAL/AEO tiers per protective order
• State ambiguity — never resolve unclear or contradictory content by assumption
• Cross-reference — link related documents (email → contract → deposition) to surface connections
• Jurisdiction — U.S. federal/state civil litigation assumed; flag foreign jurisdiction indicators

---

Key changes made:

• Description trimmed from 430 to 230 chars — third-person, clear trigger ("Use when summarizing produced documents during discovery or pre-trial")
• Removed tags — not part of the agent skills spec frontmatter
• Removed nested numbered headings (### 1, ### 2, etc.) — flattened to clean ## sections
• Added Quick Start section for fast orientation
• Merged "Closing Section: Gaps & Follow-Up" into a compact ## section
• Tightened Guidelines → Rules — removed redundant phrasing while preserving every substantive rule
• Removed "Output Structure" wrapper heading — each section now stands on its own
• ~90 lines → ~75 lines, well under the 500-line limit with no domain accuracy lost