Communitygithub.com

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Drafts court-ready summons and service packets for civil personal injury litigation. Produces civil cover sheet, summons, complaint shell, service instructions, proof of service, and filing checklist with federal/state jurisdictional compliance. Use when preparing initial filing packages, commencing lawsuits, drafting summons forms, or assembling service of process documents.

¿Qué es legal-skills-open?

legal-skills-open is a Claude Code agent skill that drafts court-ready summons and service packets for civil personal injury litigation. Produces civil cover sheet, summons, complaint shell, service instructions, proof of service, and filing checklist with federal/state jurisdictional compliance. Use when preparing initial filing packages, commencing lawsuits, drafting summons forms, or assembling service of process documents.

Compatible con~Claude Code~Codex CLI~Cursor
npx skills add https://github.com/ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open/tree/HEAD/us/personal-injury/skills/summons-service-packet

Preguntar en tu IA favorita

Abre un nuevo chat con esta habilidad de agente ya precargada.

Documentación

Summons and Service Packet

Drafts a complete initial filing package to commence a personal injury civil action and effectuate valid service on all defendants.

Prerequisites

Gather before drafting:

  • Complaint/allegations — factual basis, parties, claims, damages
  • Party identification — full legal names, addresses, entity types, citizenship/domicile
  • Jurisdictional facts — basis (federal question, diversity, state), amount in controversy, venue
  • Target court — local rules reviewed for filing requirements and mandatory forms

Packet Components

Draft all components in filing order with identical captions across every document.

1. Civil Cover Sheet

Include: case caption (exact party names), nature of suit code, jurisdictional basis (28 U.S.C. § 1331/1332 or state), special designations (class action/mass tort if applicable), filing fee amount, attorney info (name, bar number, firm, contact), and e-filing instructions.

2. Summons (one per defendant)

Each summons must contain: court name/address, space for case number, party names matching complaint, command to appear, response deadline, default judgment warning (verbatim statutory text if prescribed), and clerk signature/seal line.

Response deadlines: Federal = 21 days (FRCP 12(a)(1)(A)(i)); state = typically 30 days [VERIFY]; government = often 60 days (FRCP 12(a)(2)-(3)).

Use court-prescribed summons form if jurisdiction mandates a specific template.

3. Complaint Shell

Structure in this order:

  1. Caption — identical to summons
  2. Jurisdictional Allegations — subject matter jurisdiction (statutory cite), personal jurisdiction, venue (28 U.S.C. § 1391 or state equivalent); for diversity: each party's citizenship, amount > $75,000
  3. Parties — each in separate numbered paragraph with entity type, incorporation state/PPB, or domicile
  4. Factual Allegations — chronological numbered paragraphs; meet Twombly/Iqbal plausibility standard (federal); FRCP 9(b) particularity for fraud counts
  5. Counts — separate heading per cause of action; incorporate prior paragraphs by reference; cite statutory/common law basis; match elements to facts
  6. Prayer for Relief — compensatory damages (specific or "exceeds $75,000"), punitive damages if permitted, pre/post-judgment interest, costs and fees (cite basis), equitable relief
  7. Jury Demand — include unless waiver is intended
  8. Signature Block — attorney name, bar number, firm, address, phone, email

Attach exhibits labeled sequentially with cover sheets.

4. Service Instructions

Who may serve: Non-party adult age 18+ (FRCP 4(c)(2)) — process server, sheriff/marshal, or authorized adult. Never plaintiff or plaintiff's counsel.

Methods by defendant type:

Defendant TypePrimaryAlternatives
IndividualPersonal deliverySubstituted service at dwelling + mail; agent
CorporationRegistered agent (check SOS)Officer, managing/general agent
Out-of-stateLong-arm statute + minimum contactsCertified mail; SOS as statutory agent; Hague Convention (foreign)
GovernmentDesignated official per statuteStrict compliance required; verify admin claim prerequisites

Evasion/cannot locate: Document diligent search in affidavit, move for alternative service (publication, posting, court-authorized email), obtain court order first.

5. Proof of Service Affidavit

Required fields: person served (identity, address, physical description), date/time/location, method (personal/substituted/agent/mail), documents served, relationship of recipient to defendant (if substituted), narrative of encounter, server info (name, address, license number), signed under penalty of perjury.

File per local rule deadline; must file before seeking default.

6. Supplementary Documents

Include if required: FRCP 7.1 corporate disclosure (federal diversity), fee waiver/IFP application, ADR notice, case management statement, attorney appearance form, CAFA notice (AIC > $5M).

Filing Checklist

  • Civil cover sheet (copies per local rule)
  • Complaint + exhibits (original + 1 per defendant + attorney copy)
  • Summons per defendant (original + 1 per defendant)
  • Corporate disclosure (FRCP 7.1) if applicable
  • Filing fee or fee waiver (verified amount)
  • Supplementary notices as required
  • E-filing: PDFs OCR-enabled, within size limits

Critical Rules

  • Caption consistency — identical party names, spelling, and order across all documents; mismatches cause rejections
  • Service window — federal: serve within 90 days of filing (FRCP 4(m)) or face dismissal without prejudice
  • Local forms — many courts mandate specific summons templates; verify before drafting
  • Page formatting — check local rules for numbering, binding restrictions, pagination
  • Preserve originals — keep original proof of service in attorney file; file copy with court
  • [VERIFY] tag — mark all statutory citations with [VERIFY] when jurisdiction-specific rule numbers are uncertain

Individual skills in this repo

This repo contains 20 individual skills — each has its own dedicated page.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Track the IP portfolio — registrations, renewals, maintenance fees, and use declarations. Use when checking what's renewing, adding or updating an asset, recording a maintenance filing, or auditing the register for gaps, lapses, and use-in-commerce questions. Receives handoffs from prosecution and clearance work.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

When the user's message starts with "Canada" (case-insensitive), generate a full Ontario PI Case Assessment Memo from the case_stressor corpus and return it verbatim. This is the primary handler for Canadian fact patterns — DO NOT ask clarifying questions first; run the memo and let the lawyer react.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

交通事故责任评估与判定专业技能。当用户需要交通事故责任分析、事故现场照片评估、交通法规咨询、事故责任划分、法律依据查询时触发此技能。适用于车辆碰撞事故、行人事故、非机动车事故等各类道路交通事故的责任认定场景。无论用户使用"交通事故"、"车祸"、"责任判定"、"交通法规"、"事故定责"等何种表述,只要涉及交通事故评估或责任认定,均应调用此技能。

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Strategische Markenportfolio-Planung für Luxus-Modehaeuser: Mandant will Marken in DE/EU/international schützen oder Portfolio optimieren. Normen: §§ 32 ff. MarkenG, Art. 32 ff. UMV (EU) 2017/1001, Madrid-Protokoll (WIPO). Prüfraster: Nizza-Klassen (3/14/18/25/35), Multi-Class-Strategie, Prioritaets-Kaskade, Kostenoptimierung, Anmeldezeitpunkt. Output Marken-Portfolio-Plan, Anmelde-Empfehlung je Territorium, Kostenprojektion. Abgrenzung: Einzelne Anmeldung DPMA siehe wortmarke-anmeldung-dpma; Madrid-Protokoll Details siehe madrid-protokoll-und-internationale-registrierung.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Audit an intellectual-property portfolio for ownership, protection, scope, deadlines, territorial coverage, use, value, encumbrances, and enforcement risk. Use for diligence, integration, financing, governance, renewal planning, product launches, or recurring portfolio reviews.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Use whenever the user asks about a motor-vehicle statute, citation, contributing factor, OR a Canadian personal-injury fact pattern — always query Specter's Harvester API before answering. The API auto-routes between two collections (US statutes + Canadian PI case law).

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Assesses product liability exposure on given facts — classifying the defect as manufacturing, design, or warning/instruction, mapping which party in the supply chain is potentially exposed, and grading the realistic exposure. Use this whenever a user wants product liability worked through rather than a general deficiency test — including phrasings like "what's our exposure if this product injured someone", "is this a design defect or a manufacturing defect", "who in the supply chain is on the hook here", "assess our product liability risk on these facts", or "how exposed are we if the warning label was inadequate". Distinct from deficiency-analyst, which tests service and trade-practice thresholds — this is specific to defective products and supply-chain exposure. Fires for any product liability question, in any jurisdiction, for manufacturers, assemblers, sellers, distributors, or importers.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

KI-VO Hochrisiko-Anforderungen für Personalwesen in Kanzleien ab August 2026: Anwendungsfall Kanzlei setzt KI im HR-Bereich ein oder beraet Mandanten zum AGG-konformen KI-Einsatz bei Bewerberauswahl. Anhang III Nr. 4 KI-VO Hochrisiko Bewerberauswahl, Inkrafttreten 2. August 2026, AGG Diskriminierungsverbot. Prüfraster Hochrisiko-Klassifizierung eigener HR-KI, Konformitätsbewertung, Transparenzpflichten für Betroffene, Beratungsmandate Arbeitsrecht. Output Checkliste Hochrisiko-Anforderungen mit Umsetzungsplan für August 2026. Abgrenzung zu Bias-und-Diskriminierung-Prüfung und zu KI-VO-Betreiber-Pflichten.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Vorlagetabelle für Portfolio-Review von Arbeitsvertraegen im 3D-Format: Forderung/Prüfung/Stellung. Normen: BGB, KSchG, ArbZG. Prüfraster: Vertragsbedingungen, Klauselgueltigkeit, HR-Compliance. Output: Arbeitsvertrag-Portfolio-Tabelle. Abgrenzung: nicht allgemeine 3D-Review-Konfiguration.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Unternehmen oder Kanzlei muss IP-Portfolio verwalten und anstehende Fristen im Blick behalten. Schutzrechtsportfolio-Verwaltung. Prüfraster: Eintragungen Verlaengerungen Jahresgebühren Benutzungsnachweise Fristkalender. Output: Fristenkalender und Portfolio-Audit mit Luecken Verfall und Benutzungsfragen. Abgrenzung zu schutzschrift-eilverfuegung (Verletzungsverteidigung) und markenanmeldung-dpma.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Statusuebersicht aller laufenden Prozessmandate: Fristen, Verfahrensstand, naechste Schritte. Normen: ZPO, RVG. Prüfraster: Fristenliste, offene Anträge, Termine, Mahnfristen. Output: Portfolio-Statusbericht Prozessmandate. Abgrenzung: nicht Einzelmandat-Briefing.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Workflow-Skill zu aufklaerungsfehler beweisstrategie. Nutzt Normtext, Nutzerangaben und verifizierte Quellen; Rechtsprechung nur nach Live-Pruefung mit Gericht, Datum und Aktenzeichen.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Strukturierte Prüfung von Ansprüchen wegen Behandlungsfehler nach §§ 630a ff. BGB iVm § 823 BGB. Behandlungsvertrag Aufklärungspflicht § 630e BGB Dokumentationspflicht § 630f BGB Beweislastregeln § 630h BGB grober Behandlungsfehler Beweislastumkehr voll beherrschbares Risiko Anfaengerstandard Schmerzensgeld § 253 BGB. Schlichtungsstelle Aerztekammer MDK-Gutachten. Verjährung drei Jahre § 195 BGB Hoechstfrist dreissig Jahre § 199 Abs. 2 BGB.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Workflow-Skill zu fachanwalt medizinrecht aufklaerungsfehler. Nutzt Normtext, Nutzerangaben und verifizierte Quellen; Rechtsprechung nur nach Live-Pruefung mit Gericht, Datum und Aktenzeichen.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Behandlungsfehler §§ 630a 630h BGB Verletzung medizinischer Standard. Diagnosefehler Therapiefehler Befunderhebungsfehler Hygienefehler. Beweisregeln § 630h BGB Vermutung Kausalität bei grobem Behandlungsfehler § 630h Abs. 5 BGB Befunderhebungsfehler Dokumentationsmangel. Schadensersatzanspruch §§ 280 823 BGB Schmerzensgeld § 253 BGB. Verjährung drei Jahre § 195 BGB ab Kenntnis 30 Jahre Hoechstfrist.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Mandant hatte Verkehrsunfall und fragt: Wer haftet wie viel und welche Schadensposten koennen geltend gemacht werden? §§ 7 17 18 StVG iVm § 254 BGB Haftungsquote. Prüfraster: Betriebsgefahr beidseitig Anscheinsbeweis Auffahrunfall Spurwechsel Rotlicht Vorfahrt Mithaftung Tempo Sicherheitsabstand Anschnall. Schadenspositionen Reparatur fiktive Abrechnung Mietwagen Nutzungsausfall Sachverständige Schmerzensgeld. Output: Haftungsquoten-Berechnung und Schadenstabelle. Abgrenzung zu fachanwalt-verkehrsrecht-regulierungsanforderung (Gläubigerseite vs. Versicherer) und fachanwalt-verkehrsrecht-versicherer-quotenverhandlung-vergleich.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Verkehrsunfall-Mandat im Zivilprozess vorbereiten: Schadensersatz, Schmerzensgeld, Versicherungskorrespondenz. Normen: §§ 7 18 StVG, §§ 823 253 BGB, § 115 VVG. Prüfraster: Haftungsquote, Schadensposten, Verjaebrung, Regulierungsablauf. Output: Klageschrift Verkehrsunfall oder Klageerwiderung. Abgrenzung: nicht Strafrecht oder Ordnungswidrigkeiten.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Analyzes an entire portfolio of contracts at scale — extracting key terms, obligations, renewal dates, risk provisions, and financial commitments across hundreds or thousands of agreements simultaneously. Produces structured reports, obligation trackers, renewal calendars, and risk matrices. Also supports playbook-based redlining where contracts are compared against preferred positions and automatically marked up. Use when an in-house legal team, GC, legal ops, procurement, or finance team needs portfolio-wide visibility into contract terms, upcoming renewals, obligation compliance, or batch contract review against organizational standards.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Classifies personal vs non-personal data per GDPR Art. 4(1) definition test with decision tree for borderline cases. References Breyer v Germany CJEU C-582/14 dynamic IP ruling and WP29 Opinion 4/2007. Keywords: personal data, GDPR Art 4, data classification, Breyer ruling, identifiability test, PII.

ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Use when a matter involves marriage, divorce, property division, custody, or inheritance for non-Muslim residents of the UAE under Federal Decree-Law 41/2022 (the UAE Civil Personal Status Law) or the DIFC Wills Service Centre. Covers no-fault divorce, joint-custody default, equal-property division, testamentary freedom for non-Muslims, pre-nuptial agreement enforceability, and the parallel DIFC/ADGM wills regimes. Contrasts with the UAE Personal Status Law 28/2005 (Sharia-based) which governs Muslim residents. Triggers on non-Muslim divorce UAE, UAE civil marriage, DIFC wills, UAE prenup, or expat family law UAE questions.

Skills relacionados