# Draft Case Assessment Memorandum > A litigation case assessment memo must evaluate each claim and defense with its evidentiary support, assess damages exposure in a reasoned range, consider insurance and venue implications, and provide a clear disposition recommendation. - Skill: `finchipaiorg/draft-case-assessment-memorandum` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add finchipaiorg/draft-case-assessment-memorandum` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/finchipaiorg/draft-case-assessment-memorandum/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: FinchipAIOrg (https://skillmd.com/u/finchipaiorg) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/finchipaiorg/draft-case-assessment-memorandum --- # Skill: Draft Case Assessment Memorandum — Litigation Risk Analysis for Distribution Agreement Dispute ## 1. Subject-matter triage - Treat the complaint, distribution agreement, correspondence, internal emails, damages report, and related documents as a single integrated record. - Identify the governing agreement, the asserted causes of action, the operative termination/performance provisions, and the forum and governing-law provisions before analysis. - If the record contains multiple claims, defenses, periods of alleged breach, or damages theories, enumerate them first and analyze each separately. - If only one claim, one damages theory, or one governing-law regime is actually in scope, say so explicitly and explain why. ## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting - Analyzing claims in the abstract without tethering each element to specific facts in the source documents - Treating the plaintiff’s damages demand as the endpoint instead of independently testing the support, assumptions, offsets, and contract limits - Ignoring insurance and coverage issues that materially affect net exposure and settlement posture - Failing to address venue, forum, and procedural posture as part of the practical risk picture - Concluding with a narrative summary only, instead of a concrete disposition recommendation and action plan - Stating legal conclusions without identifying the controlling rule, statute, or case that supports them - Collapsing distinct claims, defenses, accrual dates, or damages theories into one blended analysis ## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply - Structure the memo in standard litigation-assessment order: facts, claims, defenses, damages, insurance/coverage, venue, and recommendation. - For each claim, apply the governing elements under the relevant common law, statute, or contract doctrine, and test each element against the developed record. - For breach of contract, address contract formation, performance, breach, causation, and damages under the governing law identified in the materials or otherwise applicable. - For fraud or misrepresentation theories, analyze the heightened pleading and proof requirements, justifiable reliance, scienter, causation, and any remedies distinctions. - For termination-related disputes, focus on contractual notice, cure, cause versus convenience, exclusivity, performance standards, and any discretionary rights or limitations. - For limitations defenses, identify the accrual rule, any tolling or discovery doctrines, and how the timeline in the documents affects each claim. - For punitive or enhanced damages, identify the governing standard and assess whether the pleaded facts plausibly meet it. - For insurance issues, examine potentially responsive coverage, exclusions, retentions, conditions, and reservation-of-rights issues that affect practical recovery or funding. - Cite the controlling authority for each legal proposition by name and section, rule, or case when the proposition is relied on. ## 4. Analytical scaffolds - Start from the complaint and agreement, then map each asserted claim to the specific contractual language and event timeline. - For every claim, apply a consistent sequence: legal standard, supporting evidence, adverse evidence, risk assessment, and net litigation consequence. - Break damages into distinct categories reflected in the record, then test each category against contract language, causation, mitigation, offsets, and admissible proof. - Use internal emails and correspondence to identify admissions, credibility issues, notice defects, intent, knowledge, and contemporaneous business understanding. - Assess each affirmative defense on its own facts and legal footing, rather than listing defenses generically. - When more than one party, period, or theory is implicated, run the same analytic frame for each item and keep the conclusions separate. - Where the record permits a range rather than a single number, present a reasoned exposure range grounded in the documents and governing law, not a raw plaintiff ask. - If a factual assertion depends on an internal document, quote or paraphrase only what is necessary and stay within the anti-leakage limits. ## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships - Track the chronology of notice, alleged breach, cure periods, termination, post-termination conduct, and litigation milestones. - Compare the agreement’s operative provisions against later correspondence, operational conduct, and any damages assumptions that depend on those provisions. - Note interactions among claims that may share the same event, the same damages base, or the same limitations problem. - Distinguish between pre-termination and post-termination conduct where liability, causation, or damages differ. - If the same document affects both liability and damages, explain both effects without merging the analyses. - Where venue or forum provisions interact with enforcement or tactical posture, state the practical consequence for the client. ## 6. Output structure conventions - Use a conventional memorandum format with a clear subject line, date if available, and concise issue framing. - Begin with an executive summary that states the bottom-line risk view and recommendation. - Follow with factual background, then claim-by-claim analysis, then damages, defenses, insurance/coverage, venue, and strategic considerations. - For each claim section, include: governing standard, plaintiff-supporting facts, defense facts, and risk assessment. - Present damages in a reasoned range with categories, assumptions, and any contractual or legal constraints. - Include a distinct defense section that addresses the strongest affirmative defenses and their likely effect on outcome. - Include an insurance and coverage section that addresses potential funding sources and coverage obstacles. - Include a venue and forum section that addresses likely litigation consequences, not just doctrine. - End with a recommended disposition and an action-oriented next steps section. - Frame recommendations in the imperative, assign them to an appropriate responsible role where identifiable, and tie them to a timing anchor or litigation milestone. - Do not let the memo drift into bare issue spotting; every issue should end in a consequence for exposure, leverage, or disposition.