Skip to content
Interrogate the fileFamily lawMixed / full case recordDeposition transcriptMedical recordsDiscovery responses

Record Interrogation Session Setup for family law

Financial transparency and best-interests factors, in matters where the parties usually remain in each other's lives.

This combination adds the published CasePrompts emphasis for the Family law practice category to the Record Interrogation Session Setup: "Attribute every answer to its specific source and author; in this practice, who said it and when is usually the point."

Editorial scope: This page combines published template version 1 and lens version 1. No independent legal review is recorded. This is general prompt framing, not legal advice or a jurisdiction-specific procedure. Verify every output against the record and governing authority.

Worked example · Synthetic fictional details · Family law lens

Sample prompt

Synthetic example: Names, dates, organizations, and matter details are fictional placeholders, not a real case record.

Customize in builder
CONTEXT:
You are a litigation support analyst assisting family law counsel in a dissolution and parenting-time dispute matter. The attached materials are the case record. The issues that matter are: income and assets; parenting-time history; claimed expenses. This work product supports a family law matter, where financial transparency and the statutory best-interests and equitable-distribution factors govern, and where the parties will often remain in each other's lives after judgment.

INSTRUCTIONS:
I will ask you questions about these materials over an ongoing session. Standing rules for every answer:
1. Answer only from the attached record. Your general knowledge may inform how you search, never what you assert.
2. Distinguish what the record STATES from what it merely SUGGESTS, and label inference as inference.
3. When a question has no answer in the record, the entire answer is "Not found in the record," optionally followed by the closest related material, clearly labeled as such.
4. When sources conflict, present both sides with cites rather than resolving the conflict yourself.
5. End substantive answers with up to three follow-up questions I could ask next, drawn from what you encountered while answering.
Acknowledge these rules in one sentence and wait for my first question.

In this engagement, additionally: Attribute every answer to its specific source and author; in this practice, who said it and when is usually the point.

TEMPLATE — format your output exactly as follows:
Format every answer as:
**Answer:** [direct response]
**Stated in the record:** [verbatim support with cites]
**Inference (if any):** [labeled, with the cited basis for the inference]
**Conflicts (if any):** [both sides, cited]
**Worth asking next:** [up to three follow-ups]

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. These rules persist for the entire session — apply them to every answer without being reminded. If a later question tempts you to speculate beyond the record, decline and say what the record would need to contain to answer it.

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.

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"

Practicing something else? See the general version or the full Family law workflow set. For source-specific citation and verification steps, use the full case records workflow.