casemark/ime-report-summary
skills/legal/ime-report-summary/SKILL.md
Critically analyzes defense IME reports by auditing record completeness, comparing findings against treating physician records, and surfacing bias indicators and cross-examination vulnerabilities. Triggers when reviewing an IME report, preparing for defense expert deposition, or building a rebuttal strategy in personal injury litigation.
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add casemark/skills ime-report-summaryInstall 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 4, 2026, 3:41 AM42.1s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- ime-report-summary
- description:
- Critically analyzes defense IME reports by auditing record completeness, comparing findings against treating physician records, and surfacing bias indicators and cross-examination vulnerabilities. Triggers when reviewing an IME report, preparing for defense expert deposition, or building a rebuttal strategy in personal injury litigation.
IME Report Critical Analysis
Produce a plaintiff-side critical analysis memorandum of a defense IME report. The output is usable for cross-examination outlines, expert witness preparation, and admissibility motions.
Prerequisites
- IME report — complete defense medical expert report
- Treating physician records — notes, diagnoses, treatment plans
- Diagnostic imaging — MRI, CT, X-ray results
- Therapy records — PT, OT, pain management documentation
- Prior medical exams — pre-incident or subsequent examinations (if any)
Workflow
Step 1 — Examination Overview
Populate this table from the IME report:
| Field | Detail | |-------|--------| | Examiner | Name, credentials, specialty | | Referral source | Defense counsel / insurance carrier | | Date & location | When and where conducted | | Questions posed | Specific issues examiner addressed | | Scope limitations | Records not reviewed, tests not performed |
Step 2 — Examinee Profile
Summarize: demographics, injury mechanism, current symptoms, treatment timeline, legal context.
Step 3 — Records Review Audit
- List every document the IME examiner claims to have reviewed.
- Compare against the complete medical file.
- Flag all omitted records — missing records ground a challenge for incomplete analysis.
Step 4 — History Discrepancy Analysis
Compare the IME's recitation of patient history against treating records:
| Issue | IME States | Treating Records Show | Significance | |-------|-----------|----------------------|--------------| | Symptom onset | | | | | Complaint severity | | | | | Functional limitations | | | | | Treatment response | | | |
Flag symptoms minimized or absent from the IME that appear in treating notes, and physical exam findings conflicting with contemporaneous treating exams.
Step 5 — Comparative Medical Analysis
Side-by-side comparison on each contested issue:
| Issue | IME Opinion | Treating Physician Opinion | Supporting Authority | |-------|-------------|---------------------------|---------------------| | Causation | | | | | MMI status | | | | | Permanent impairment rating | | | | | Future care needs | | | | | Work restrictions / disability | | | |
Cite AMA Guides, specialty clinical guidelines, and peer-reviewed literature. Mark uncertain citations with [VERIFY].
Step 6 — Bias & Impeachment Indicators
Check each that applies:
- [ ] Minimizes subjective complaints without objective basis
- [ ] Selectively cites records favoring defense; ignores contrary evidence
- [ ] Uses outdated or non-standard diagnostic criteria
- [ ] Offers causation opinions outside examiner's specialty
- [ ] Conclusions not supported by exam findings
- [ ] Cursory examination relative to injury complexity
- [ ] Litigation history skews heavily defense-side
- [ ] Substantial income from IME work vs. patient care
- [ ] Financial relationship with referring party or insurer
- [ ] Disciplinary history or criticized methodology
Step 7 — Strategic Recommendations
Top 3–5 cross-examination vulnerabilities, each with:
- The specific weakness
- Contradicting documentary evidence or medical authority
- Suggested deposition/trial questions
Next steps:
- Supplemental expert consultation needed
- Additional medical evidence to obtain
- Rebuttal report strategy
Case impact: Note settlement leverage if IME undermines defense, or rehabilitation steps if IME presents challenges.
Pitfalls & Checks
- Use direct quotes from both IME and treating records to demonstrate contradictions.
- Every factual assertion must cite a specific document and page/section.
- Do not editorialize — let discrepancies speak; frame analysis for attorney use.
- Note jurisdiction-specific IME admissibility rules and Daubert/Frye challenge opportunities.
- Maintain professional tone suitable for attorney work product.
Related Skills
casemark/skills/legal/automated-contract-summary
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
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
21SKILL.mdUpdated May 26, 2026
casemark/obligation-mapping
tools
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
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.
21SKILL.mdUpdated May 25, 2026
casemark/horizon-scanning
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
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.
21SKILL.mdUpdated May 25, 2026
casemark/gap-analysis
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
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.
21SKILL.mdUpdated May 25, 2026