Create a practical prompt pack for a paralegal working on [MATTER TYPE AND JURISDICTION]. The work product must support [SUPERVISING ATTORNEY OR TEAM] on [CURRENT STAGE OF MATTER]. Use only these materials and facts: [SOURCE MATERIAL AND FACTS]. The applicable court, rules, deadlines, and confidentiality limits are [PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS]. The main tasks I need help with are [TASKS NEEDED]. Produce 6 copy-paste prompts, each 120–180 words, for the most relevant tasks selected from: case chronology, document review, discovery requests or responses, deposition preparation, witness or exhibit index, legal research issue outline, citation verification, filing checklist, and client-information summary. For each prompt, include: - A precise role and task boundary. - Fill-in inputs in square brackets. - The required output format, such as a table, numbered chronology, issue outline, or checklist. - Instructions to quote or cite the supplied source by document name, page or Bates range when available. - A clear instruction not to provide legal advice, decide legal strategy, alter source wording, or invent authority, facts, dates, citations, privilege status, or procedural rules. - A final attorney-review checkpoint identifying what counsel must validate. Prefer neutral, auditable work product. For discovery and privilege-related work, require a separate “potentially privileged / needs attorney review” flag rather than a conclusion. For deadlines, require the source rule or order and identify any calculation assumptions. Before answering, check that every prompt preserves attorney supervision and can be completed from user-supplied records. Flag any task that needs jurisdiction-specific rules or legal judgment. Ask up to 3 clarifying questions only if a required input is missing.
Fill in
| Placeholder | What to enter | Example |
|---|---|---|
| [MATTER TYPE AND JURISDICTION] | State the practice area, case type, and jurisdiction if known. | Employment discrimination litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. |
| [SUPERVISING ATTORNEY OR TEAM] | Identify the attorney or legal team who will review and use the work. | Maya Chen, partner, and the employment litigation team. |
| [CURRENT STAGE OF MATTER] | Describe the current litigation, transaction, investigation, or filing stage. | Fact discovery; plaintiff’s first document production arrived yesterday. |
| [SOURCE MATERIAL AND FACTS] | List or paste the documents, notes, data, and confirmed facts available. | Complaint, answer, scheduling order, 14 production PDFs with Bates labels, witness list, and intake interview notes. |
| [PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS] | Provide relevant court, rules, orders, deadlines, and confidentiality instructions. | Protective order applies; discovery closes March 18; use the scheduling order as the authority for dates. |
| [TASKS NEEDED] | List the paralegal tasks you want the prompt pack to cover. | Chronology, document review summary, deposition exhibit index, and a discovery-response checklist. |
How to use
- Select only tasks supported by the records you can safely provide, following your firm’s confidentiality and approved-AI policies.
- Paste the prompt pack request with the jurisdiction, source list, and supervising attorney’s review role.
- For each resulting task prompt, require document identifiers and page or Bates references in the output.
- Follow up with: “Revise prompt 2 so its review table has columns for source, Bates range, fact, issue, and attorney-review question.”
Variations
Document review
Use when you need a consistent first-pass review table.
Review [DOCUMENT SET] for [ISSUES TO TRACK] in support of [MATTER]. Produce a table with document name, date, author, recipients, Bates or page range, relevant excerpt, factual significance, and follow-up question. Quote short excerpts exactly and distinguish document facts from your summaries. Do not decide relevance, privilege, authenticity, or legal significance; label those as [ATTORNEY REVIEW]. Do not infer missing dates or identities. Use only the supplied records and ask up to 3 questions if a necessary file or issue list is missing.
Case chronology
Use when counsel needs a sourced event timeline.
Build a chronological case timeline from [SOURCE DOCUMENTS] for [MATTER AND TIME PERIOD]. Return a table with date, event, participants, source document, page or Bates range, direct supporting language, and unresolved question. Sort by date; keep uncertain dates in a separate section rather than guessing. Note conflicts between sources. Do not characterize credibility, fault, notice, or legal consequence. Add a final attorney-review list of facts needing confirmation. Ask up to 3 questions only if the source set or scope is missing.
Filing checklist
Use when preparing attorney-reviewed filing logistics.
Create an attorney-review filing checklist for [FILING TYPE] in [COURT OR AGENCY]. Use [RULES, ORDER, AND FACTS PROVIDED]. Include required components, formatting items, service steps, exhibits, signatures, proposed orders, deadline source, and docketing steps. For each item, list the source rule or order and a status field. Do not claim a requirement unless it appears in the supplied authority; mark missing authority [VERIFY WITH COUNSEL]. Do not calculate a deadline without the governing rule and trigger date. Ask up to 3 questions if those are missing.
Tips
- Use an approved, secure tool and follow firm rules before pasting any client, employee, medical, financial, or privileged material.
- Ask for document names and page or Bates references in every factual summary; this makes attorney review faster and exposes unsupported assertions.
- Keep a human decision point for privilege, responsiveness, relevance, legal conclusions, and deadline calculations.
- For research support, use AI to form an issue list or search plan, then verify every authority in an authoritative legal database and against current local rules.
FAQ
Can a paralegal use ChatGPT for legal research?
It can help organize issues and generate search terms, but it is not a substitute for verified legal research. An attorney or qualified legal professional should validate authorities, holdings, currency, and jurisdiction.
Can AI decide whether a document is privileged?
No. It can surface potential privilege indicators, but privilege analysis requires attorney review and context.
What should be in an AI-generated chronology?
Each event should trace back to a document and page or Bates range. Preserve conflicts and uncertainty instead of resolving them by inference.