Demand Letter Facts Section
Draft the facts and damages narrative of a demand from the record itself — every sentence cite-backed, gaps flagged instead of papered over.
Worked example · Synthetic fictional details
Sample prompt
Synthetic example: The names, dates, case details, and issues below are fictional CasePrompts sample values, not client data or evidence from a real matter. They demonstrate the prompt format, not the accuracy of any AI model's output.
Preview the complete sample prompt
CONTEXT: You are a litigation support analyst assisting plaintiff's counsel in a motor vehicle negligence matter. The attached materials are the case record for Teresa Okafor arising from an incident on March 4, 2024. You are drafting the factual portions of a demand letter addressed to the bodily injury adjuster. The theories that matter are: rear-end collision; cervical disc herniation; 14 weeks of conservative care. INSTRUCTIONS: Draft three sections of the demand in a confident, factual, professional tone — persuasive through specificity, never through adjectives: 1. THE INCIDENT — what happened, drawn only from the record. 2. COURSE OF TREATMENT — a narrative distillation of the medical record: initial presentation, diagnoses as stated, treatment arc, current status, and any permanency or future-care language providers actually used. 3. IMPACT — work missed, restrictions, and documented life impact. Every sentence must be followed by a bracketed record cite. State no legal conclusions and no settlement figures. Where the record is silent on something a demand would ordinarily include, do not fill the gap — list it in the gaps section instead. TEMPLATE — format your output exactly as follows: ## The Incident [narrative paragraphs, each sentence followed by a bracketed cite] ## Course of Treatment [narrative paragraphs, same citation discipline] ## Impact [narrative paragraphs, same citation discipline] ## Gaps for attorney attention Bullet list: what a complete demand would say here, and what the record currently lacks to say it. EVIDENCE REQUIREMENTS: For every finding, identify the source document by name and cite page:line for transcripts, timestamps for audio/video, and Bates/page for documents. Render every cite in square brackets at the end of the sentence it supports. Quote providers verbatim for diagnosis, causation, and permanency language. Use [BRACKETED PLACEHOLDERS] for any detail the drafting attorney must supply (policy numbers, claim numbers, enclosure lists). If the record does not support a statement, omit the statement and log it under gaps — never write toward a fact that is not in the record. If the provided record does not support a requested finding, write "not found in the record." Do not infer or fill gaps from outside knowledge. The scope is limited to the requested task, stated issues, and provided record. Do not introduce outside subjects or sources. A human reviewer must verify every material statement and citation against the source record before relying on or sharing the output.
Through the Civil / insurance defense lens
Maintain a neutral, evaluative tone appropriate for carrier reporting; keep established facts and the plaintiff's contentions visibly separate throughout.
Through the Commercial litigation lens
Tie every factual premise to a document with a Bates cite; recollection unsupported by the record gets flagged, not adopted.
Through the Employment litigation lens
Build examination sequences that commit decision-makers to the reasons and the timing before any confrontation with the documents.
Through the Medical malpractice — defense lens
Keep established chart facts and the plaintiff's allegations visibly separate, and let the contemporaneous documentation carry the persuasion.
Through the Medical malpractice — plaintiff lens
Write toward the causation chain — each clinical decision linked to its consequence — with provider language quoted verbatim and no medical conclusions the record does not state.
Through the Personal injury — plaintiff lens
Write toward a coherent narrative of fault and harm; specificity about the client's documented losses carries the persuasion — never adjectives.
Through the Probate & estate litigation lens
Keep it factual and element-driven; probate courts reward precision over heat, and a clean record cite persuades where adjectives do not.
Through the Workers' compensation — claimant lens
Write toward the statutory touchpoints — notice, causal connection, restrictions, wage loss — with provider and employer language quoted verbatim.
Through the Workers' compensation — employer/carrier lens
Maintain a neutral, evaluative tone appropriate for carrier reporting, keeping established facts and the claimant's contentions visibly separate.
AI output is a starting point, not work product. Verify every citation against the record before you rely on it, file it, or send it.
What you'll fill in
- 01Your role
- 02Case typee.g., "trucking liability," "first-party property," "medical malpractice"
- 03Key issue(s) — 1 to 3e.g., "vehicle speed at impact; brake maintenance; visibility"
- 04Claimant / patient name
- 05Date of incident / losse.g., "March 4, 2024"
- 06Recipient / audience(optional)e.g., "claims adjuster," "client," "mediator"
Pro tip The gaps section is the real product — it's your to-do list before the demand goes out.
Record-first path
Related verification workflow
Related templates
AI Deposition Outline Prompt from the Record
Turn the verified case record into a topic-based deposition outline with fact-locking goals, record-cited exhibits, conflict probes, and open-to-closed question sequences.
Requests for Admission Drafter
Draft Requests for Admission aimed at single facts the record already supports — one fact each, grouped by issue, plus authentication RFAs and the facts you still need.
Interrogatory Answer Support Builder
Gather the record facts and cites that support each interrogatory answer — facts only, gaps flagged, so the attorney drafts from evidence instead of memory.