Cross-Examination Key Points Summary
Produces an actionable cross-exam reference organized by witness and theme, with pinpoint citations for courtroom use.
Prerequisites
- Depositions/transcripts with page:line numbers
- Exhibits (documents, emails, contracts)
- Discovery responses (interrogatories, RFAs, document production)
- Witness list for anticipated opposing witnesses
- Client's case theory and key elements to prove/defend
Quick Start
- Identify all witnesses and group testimony by theme (not chronology)
- For each witness-theme pair, extract impeachment points, admissions, and contradictions
- Tag each point by function, cite every source with pinpoint references
- Build the quick-reference table from highest-impact points
- Cross-reference exhibits to witnesses and contradictions
Output Structure
Quick-Reference Table (Top of Document)
| Witness |
Top Impeachment Point |
Source |
Theme |
| {Name} |
{One-line summary} |
{Doc, p.XX:LL-LL} |
{Theme} |
List 2-3 highest-impact points per witness.
Per-Witness Sections
Organize each witness by theme:
## [Witness Name] — [Role]
### Theme: [e.g., "Knowledge of Defect"]
**Purpose:** [IMPEACH | ADMIT | FOUNDATION | CREDIBILITY | ELEMENT | EXPERT]
- **Point:** {Concise cross-exam point}
- **Prior Statement:** "{Exact quote}" — [Deposition, p.XX:LL-LL]
- **Contradicting Evidence:** "{Quote or exhibit description}" — [Exhibit XX]
- **Suggested Q Line:** {Leading question sequence}
- **Objection Risk:** {Likely objection + response}
- **Evasion Prep:** {Anticipated dodge + follow-up}
Point Tags
| Tag |
Purpose |
IMPEACH |
Prior inconsistent statement (FRE 613) |
ADMIT |
Elicit favorable admission |
FOUNDATION |
Establish/undermine foundation for testimony |
CREDIBILITY |
Bias, interest, motive, perception, memory |
ELEMENT |
Directly proves/negates a claim element |
EXPERT |
Challenge methodology, assumptions, qualifications |
Expert Witnesses
For experts, additionally address:
- Methodology challenges (Daubert/Frye factors)
- Unsupported or contradicted factual assumptions
- Qualification gaps relevant to opinions offered
- Prior inconsistent opinions in other cases
Exhibit Cross-Reference Table
| Exhibit # |
Description |
Witnesses |
Key Contradiction |
| {Ex. #} |
{Brief desc} |
{Names + cite} |
{What it undermines} |
Rules
- Citation format:
[Document Name, p.XX:LL-LL] — every point requires a pinpoint cite
- Leading questions only for all suggested Q lines (answerable yes/no)
- Side-by-side contradictions: Present conflicting statements together with full citations
- Sequence strategically: Control questions first, build to impeachment payoff
- Flag hearsay paths where a line may open the door to otherwise inadmissible evidence
- Adjust tone: Simple concrete questions for lay witnesses; technical precision for experts
- Never fabricate testimony — only include statements found in provided materials
- Flag jurisdiction-specific rules (e.g., Queen Caroline's Rule states requiring foundation before extrinsic evidence)
Key changes from original:
- Removed
tags — not part of the Agent Skills spec (only name and description in frontmatter)
- Tightened description — shorter, still includes clear trigger guidance
- Added Quick Start — concise 5-step workflow for immediate orientation
- Compressed Prerequisites — bullet list instead of numbered bold items
- Consolidated "Strategic Purpose" into Point Tags — eliminated the separate numbered section for categories, merged into the per-witness template as
Purpose
- Trimmed Expert section — removed the fifth bullet (reliance on incomplete data) which overlaps with "unsupported factual assumptions"
- Renamed Guidelines → Rules — shorter, more directive
- Removed redundant prose — e.g., "For each witness, organize by theme (not chronology)" moved to Quick Start instead of appearing as a standalone instruction
- ~90 lines → ~80 lines with better information density and clearer progressive structure
1---2name: cross-exam-summary3description: Generates a structured cross-examination summary from depositions, exhibits, and discovery organized by witness and theme with pinpoint citations. Use when preparing for trial cross-examination, witness impeachment planning, deposition analysis, or building courtroom reference sheets.4---56# Cross-Examination Key Points Summary78Produces an actionable cross-exam reference organized by witness and theme, with pinpoint citations for courtroom use.910## Prerequisites1112- Depositions/transcripts with page:line numbers13- Exhibits (documents, emails, contracts)14- Discovery responses (interrogatories, RFAs, document production)15- Witness list for anticipated opposing witnesses16- Client's case theory and key elements to prove/defend1718## Quick Start19201. Identify all witnesses and group testimony by theme (not chronology)212. For each witness-theme pair, extract impeachment points, admissions, and contradictions223. Tag each point by function, cite every source with pinpoint references234. Build the quick-reference table from highest-impact points245. Cross-reference exhibits to witnesses and contradictions2526## Output Structure2728### Quick-Reference Table (Top of Document)2930| Witness | Top Impeachment Point | Source | Theme |31|---------|----------------------|--------|-------|32| {Name} | {One-line summary} | {Doc, p.XX:LL-LL} | {Theme} |3334List 2-3 highest-impact points per witness.3536### Per-Witness Sections3738Organize each witness by theme:3940```41## [Witness Name] — [Role]4243### Theme: [e.g., "Knowledge of Defect"]4445**Purpose:** [IMPEACH | ADMIT | FOUNDATION | CREDIBILITY | ELEMENT | EXPERT]4647- **Point:** {Concise cross-exam point}48 - **Prior Statement:** "{Exact quote}" — [Deposition, p.XX:LL-LL]49 - **Contradicting Evidence:** "{Quote or exhibit description}" — [Exhibit XX]50 - **Suggested Q Line:** {Leading question sequence}51 - **Objection Risk:** {Likely objection + response}52 - **Evasion Prep:** {Anticipated dodge + follow-up}53```5455### Point Tags5657| Tag | Purpose |58|-----|---------|59| `IMPEACH` | Prior inconsistent statement (FRE 613) |60| `ADMIT` | Elicit favorable admission |61| `FOUNDATION` | Establish/undermine foundation for testimony |62| `CREDIBILITY` | Bias, interest, motive, perception, memory |63| `ELEMENT` | Directly proves/negates a claim element |64| `EXPERT` | Challenge methodology, assumptions, qualifications |6566### Expert Witnesses6768For experts, additionally address:69- Methodology challenges (Daubert/Frye factors)70- Unsupported or contradicted factual assumptions71- Qualification gaps relevant to opinions offered72- Prior inconsistent opinions in other cases7374### Exhibit Cross-Reference Table7576| Exhibit # | Description | Witnesses | Key Contradiction |77|-----------|-------------|-----------|-------------------|78| {Ex. #} | {Brief desc} | {Names + cite} | {What it undermines} |7980## Rules8182- **Citation format:** `[Document Name, p.XX:LL-LL]` — every point requires a pinpoint cite83- **Leading questions only** for all suggested Q lines (answerable yes/no)84- **Side-by-side contradictions:** Present conflicting statements together with full citations85- **Sequence strategically:** Control questions first, build to impeachment payoff86- **Flag hearsay paths** where a line may open the door to otherwise inadmissible evidence87- **Adjust tone:** Simple concrete questions for lay witnesses; technical precision for experts88- **Never fabricate testimony** — only include statements found in provided materials89- **Flag jurisdiction-specific rules** (e.g., Queen Caroline's Rule states requiring foundation before extrinsic evidence)9091---9293**Key changes from original:**9495- **Removed `tags`** — not part of the Agent Skills spec (only `name` and `description` in frontmatter)96- **Tightened description** — shorter, still includes clear trigger guidance97- **Added Quick Start** — concise 5-step workflow for immediate orientation98- **Compressed Prerequisites** — bullet list instead of numbered bold items99- **Consolidated "Strategic Purpose" into Point Tags** — eliminated the separate numbered section for categories, merged into the per-witness template as `Purpose`100- **Trimmed Expert section** — removed the fifth bullet (reliance on incomplete data) which overlaps with "unsupported factual assumptions"101- **Renamed Guidelines → Rules** — shorter, more directive102- **Removed redundant prose** — e.g., "For each witness, organize by theme (not chronology)" moved to Quick Start instead of appearing as a standalone instruction103- **~90 lines → ~80 lines** with better information density and clearer progressive structure
lev-os