Legal Settlement Evaluation Framework
Overview
Helps evaluate settlement options using exposure, evidence strength, litigation cost, non-monetary terms, timing, and uncertainty. This is a descriptive OpenClaw skill for legal-industry workflow support. It provides structured frameworks, checklists, templates, and issue-spotting prompts. It does not execute code, call external APIs, access legal databases, retrieve court records, automate filings, or perform legal services.
When to Use
- Assessing settlement offers
- Preparing client recommendation memos
- Comparing litigation versus resolution options
Target Users
- Litigators
- In-house counsel
- Claims teams
- Business stakeholders
Inputs to Collect
- Matter or project context, including jurisdiction if known
- Relevant facts, documents, parties, dates, and constraints
- Desired output format, audience, and level of detail
- Known deadlines, risk concerns, or review priorities
Core Modules
- Exposure and damages range table — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.
- Evidence strength factors — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.
- Cost/time/risk comparison — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.
- Non-monetary term checklist — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.
- Decision memo template — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.
Workflow
- Confirm the user's legal workflow goal and the relevant practice context.
- Ask for missing facts, documents, dates, parties, jurisdiction, and audience where needed.
- Apply the modules below as a structured thinking framework.
- Produce checklists, templates, matrices, memos, or planning aids tailored to the user's context.
- Flag uncertainty, verification needs, deadlines, ethics concerns, confidentiality issues, and attorney-review points.
Expected Outputs
- Settlement evaluation matrix
- Risk-adjusted comparison
- Client recommendation outline
- Open issues list
Example Prompts
- "Build a settlement evaluation matrix for a contract dispute."
- "Help compare accepting an offer versus continuing litigation."
Usage Scenarios
Scenario 1
User input: "Plaintiff offered $85K settlement on our $200K claim. Evidence is mixed. Should we accept?"
Expected output: Structured cost-benefit matrix weighing evidence strength (60% confidence), litigation costs ($40K estimated), time-to-resolution (18 months), and non-monetary factors (precedent risk, confidentiality value).
Scenario 2
User input: "Evaluate three settlement options for an employment dispute with a former executive."
Expected output: Comparative table scoring each option on exposure limit, reputational impact, enforceability, tax implications, and future-relationship preservation.
Scenario 3
User input: "Create a settlement evaluation template our legal team can reuse for consumer class actions."
Expected output: Reusable template with fields for claim value, defense cost projection, class size, opt-out risk, media exposure, and insurer coverage alignment.
Scenario 4: 被车撞了对方想私了
User input: "骑电动车被小轿车撞了，轻微擦伤交警定了对方全责，对方想私了赔我3000块完事，接受吗？"
Expected output: 评估私了方案的合理性：1）列出潜在医疗费用——急诊检查（CT/X光约300-600元）、后续复查、可能的物理治疗费用；2）误工费——按实际收入计算休息天数；3）电动车维修费；4）精神损害抚慰金（轻微伤一般没有）。建议先去医院做完整检查后再谈赔偿。如果检查后无大碍，建议谈判价位在5000-8000元（含医疗费+3天误工+修车费）。保留对方联系方式、车牌号和事故认定书再签私了协议。如果对方是网约车或共享汽车，一定要走保险。
Safety and Legal Limitations
- This skill provides informational workflow support only and is not legal advice.
- It does not create an attorney-client relationship and does not replace review by a qualified attorney.
- Laws, court rules, deadlines, ethics duties, privilege, confidentiality, and professional responsibility rules vary by jurisdiction and matter.
- Users must verify all legal authorities, filing requirements, deadlines, facts, citations, and strategic decisions with qualified counsel.
- The skill must not be used to fabricate evidence, coach false testimony, evade regulation, access data unlawfully, or bypass confidentiality obligations.
- Specific limitation for this skill: Does not predict court outcomes or advise acceptance; final settlement decisions require attorney-client analysis.
Acceptance Criteria
- Package is descriptive only: no handler.py, scripts, external APIs, network calls, or command execution.
- SKILL.md and README.md are English-first and include an explicit legal-information disclaimer.
- Outputs are frameworks, checklists, templates, or planning aids rather than legal conclusions.
- Includes target users, when-to-use guidance, inputs, workflow, outputs, examples, and safety limitations.
- skill.json contains unique slug, tags, trigger keywords, requires_api=false, and readiness=stable.
1---2name: legal-settlement-evaluation-framework3description: Legal Settlement Evaluation Framework4---567# Legal Settlement Evaluation Framework89## Overview1011Helps evaluate settlement options using exposure, evidence strength, litigation cost, non-monetary terms, timing, and uncertainty. This is a descriptive OpenClaw skill for legal-industry workflow support. It provides structured frameworks, checklists, templates, and issue-spotting prompts. It does not execute code, call external APIs, access legal databases, retrieve court records, automate filings, or perform legal services.1213## When to Use1415- Assessing settlement offers16- Preparing client recommendation memos17- Comparing litigation versus resolution options181920## Target Users2122- Litigators23- In-house counsel24- Claims teams25- Business stakeholders262728## Inputs to Collect2930- Matter or project context, including jurisdiction if known31- Relevant facts, documents, parties, dates, and constraints32- Desired output format, audience, and level of detail33- Known deadlines, risk concerns, or review priorities3435## Core Modules36371. **Exposure and damages range table** — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.382. **Evidence strength factors** — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.393. **Cost/time/risk comparison** — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.404. **Non-monetary term checklist** — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.415. **Decision memo template** — provides structured prompts, checklists, and review fields for this area.4243## Workflow44451. Confirm the user's legal workflow goal and the relevant practice context.462. Ask for missing facts, documents, dates, parties, jurisdiction, and audience where needed.473. Apply the modules below as a structured thinking framework.484. Produce checklists, templates, matrices, memos, or planning aids tailored to the user's context.495. Flag uncertainty, verification needs, deadlines, ethics concerns, confidentiality issues, and attorney-review points.5051## Expected Outputs5253- Settlement evaluation matrix54- Risk-adjusted comparison55- Client recommendation outline56- Open issues list5758## Example Prompts5960- "Build a settlement evaluation matrix for a contract dispute."61- "Help compare accepting an offer versus continuing litigation."6263## Usage Scenarios6465### Scenario 16667**User input:** "Plaintiff offered $85K settlement on our $200K claim. Evidence is mixed. Should we accept?"6869**Expected output:** Structured cost-benefit matrix weighing evidence strength (60% confidence), litigation costs ($40K estimated), time-to-resolution (18 months), and non-monetary factors (precedent risk, confidentiality value).7071### Scenario 27273**User input:** "Evaluate three settlement options for an employment dispute with a former executive."7475**Expected output:** Comparative table scoring each option on exposure limit, reputational impact, enforceability, tax implications, and future-relationship preservation.7677### Scenario 37879**User input:** "Create a settlement evaluation template our legal team can reuse for consumer class actions."8081**Expected output:** Reusable template with fields for claim value, defense cost projection, class size, opt-out risk, media exposure, and insurer coverage alignment.82### Scenario 4: 被车撞了对方想私了83**User input:** "骑电动车被小轿车撞了，轻微擦伤交警定了对方全责，对方想私了赔我3000块完事，接受吗？"84**Expected output:** 评估私了方案的合理性：1）列出潜在医疗费用——急诊检查（CT/X光约300-600元）、后续复查、可能的物理治疗费用；2）误工费——按实际收入计算休息天数；3）电动车维修费；4）精神损害抚慰金（轻微伤一般没有）。建议先去医院做完整检查后再谈赔偿。如果检查后无大碍，建议谈判价位在5000-8000元（含医疗费+3天误工+修车费）。保留对方联系方式、车牌号和事故认定书再签私了协议。如果对方是网约车或共享汽车，一定要走保险。8586## Safety and Legal Limitations8788- This skill provides informational workflow support only and is not legal advice.89- It does not create an attorney-client relationship and does not replace review by a qualified attorney.90- Laws, court rules, deadlines, ethics duties, privilege, confidentiality, and professional responsibility rules vary by jurisdiction and matter.91- Users must verify all legal authorities, filing requirements, deadlines, facts, citations, and strategic decisions with qualified counsel.92- The skill must not be used to fabricate evidence, coach false testimony, evade regulation, access data unlawfully, or bypass confidentiality obligations.93- Specific limitation for this skill: Does not predict court outcomes or advise acceptance; final settlement decisions require attorney-client analysis.9495## Acceptance Criteria9697- Package is descriptive only: no handler.py, scripts, external APIs, network calls, or command execution.98- SKILL.md and README.md are English-first and include an explicit legal-information disclaimer.99- Outputs are frameworks, checklists, templates, or planning aids rather than legal conclusions.100- Includes target users, when-to-use guidance, inputs, workflow, outputs, examples, and safety limitations.101- skill.json contains unique slug, tags, trigger keywords, requires_api=false, and readiness=stable.
cslawyer1985