For ChatGPT
Litigation prompt structures for ChatGPT
ChatGPT Projects can group chats, files, and project-specific instructions. These prompts turn a broad request into a more reviewable assignment, but a well-structured prompt does not make an answer accurate by itself.
Product-source review: . Capabilities and data terms vary by plan and can change. Confirm the current product documentation and your organization’s approval before using case material.
ChatGPT for litigation — product fit and limits
Strengths
- Projects can keep related chats, uploaded files, and project instructions together.
- File upload, data analysis, and web capabilities are available on supported plans and models.
- OpenAI states that Business, Enterprise, Edu, and API data is not used to train models by default.
Watch-outs
- The model can produce plausible but unsupported facts and citations, even when the prompt requests sources.
- Data controls vary between personal and business offerings; confirm the workspace, settings, and firm policy before using case material.
- ChatGPT is not a legal citator or a substitute for checking primary authority and the underlying record.
This is an editorial product comparison, not an endorsement or a security assessment.
Using CasePrompts with ChatGPT
Create a Project (or use a dedicated chat), attach the file(s), and paste this as your first message. Attach the document rather than pasting it when possible — formatting survives better.
From the builder you can copy a finished prompt and open ChatGPT. The prompt’s source-location instruction changes with the selected document type.
Tool interfaces change — adapt as needed, and check your firm's AI use policy before uploading case materials.
Why structure helps more than “summarize this”
Every prompt is built on the CITE method — Context, Instructions, Template, Evidence. It states who is doing the review, what source is in scope, the exact task, the requested output, and how to identify supporting locations. That structure can make an answer easier to inspect, but it cannot keep a model from inventing or misreading material. Check every material output against the source.
Prompts to try in ChatGPT
All templates →Admissions & Key Testimony Extractor
Pull every admission, damaging concession, and 'I don't know' on your key issues out of a transcript — with verbatim Q&A and page:line cites.
Prior Statement Cross-Examination Builder
Align a witness's deposition against every prior statement, classify each conflict, and get a lock-in → confrontation cross sequence with dual cites.
AI Medical Chronology Prompt for Lawyers
Build a date-ordered medical chronology from the complete record, with source citations for every encounter and explicit flags for treatment gaps, prior history, causation language, and missing records.
AI Page-Line Deposition Summary Prompt
Turn a complete deposition transcript into a topic-based page-line summary with precise cites, verbatim excerpts, admissions, exhibits, and unanswered questions.
Record Interrogation Session Setup
The standing-rules prompt: paste this once at the start of a chat session and every answer after it comes cited, sourced, and honest about gaps.
Expert Report vs. Deposition Audit
Audit an expert's deposition against their report: new opinions, abandoned opinions, changed bases, and undisclosed reliance materials — exclusion-motion fuel.
CasePrompts is vendor-neutral and built local-first — the builder runs in your browser and never sees your case files. See how your data is handled → Know which tier of tool your firm has approved before uploading case materials to ChatGPT.
Official product sources
These first-party pages supported the capability and data-term statements above when reviewed on .