Back to Details

case-brief

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

/case-brief

/case-brief

  1. Load 
    ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/law-student/CLAUDE.md
    → outline/brief preferences.
  2. Apply the workflow below.
  3. Brief in the student's format. If drill-me mode: ask the student to state the holding first.
  1. 加载
    ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/law-student/CLAUDE.md
    → 获取大纲/案例摘要偏好设置。
  2. 应用以下工作流程。
  3. 按照学生偏好的格式撰写案例摘要。如果是drill-me模式：要求学生先陈述holding。

Purpose

目的

A case brief is a tool for remembering what a case does. This skill makes one in your format — the format you'll actually use in your outline.
case brief是用于记住案例核心内容的工具。本技能会按照你实际用于大纲的格式生成case brief。

Confidence discipline

严谨性准则

Case briefs state holdings, rules, and reasoning. Getting them wrong turns your outline into a false map. The rule for this skill:
  • If you paste the case text: I extract holding/rule/reasoning from what's in front of me. Confident.
  • If you only give a case name: I brief from knowledge. Worth a lot less. I flag every line I'm not sure about with 
    [UNCERTAIN: specific reason]
    , and I strongly recommend you confirm against the actual case before putting the brief in your outline. If I don't know the case well enough, I say so.
  • If the case has famous-but-contested interpretations: I give the majority read and 
    [VERIFY: check your casebook and professor's framing]
    .
A brief built on my guess and your good faith is worse than no brief. Better to err toward "I'm not sure — read it yourself" than to invent.
case brief需包含holding、规则和推理过程。若内容有误，会让你的大纲变成错误的指引。本技能遵循以下规则：
  • 若你粘贴案例文本： 我会从提供的文本中提取holding/规则/推理过程，内容准确可信。
  • 若你仅提供案例名称： 我会凭借已有知识撰写摘要，但可信度较低。每一处不确定的内容都会标注
    [UNCERTAIN: 具体原因]
    ，且强烈建议你在将摘要加入大纲前对照实际案例进行确认。若我对该案例不够熟悉，会直接告知你。
  • 若该案例存在知名但有争议的解读： 我会给出多数派的解读，并标注
    [VERIFY: 查阅你的案例教材和教授的讲解框架]
    。
基于我的猜测和你的信任构建的摘要，不如不做摘要。与其编造内容，不如直接说“我不确定——请你自己阅读原文”。

Load context

加载上下文

~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/law-student/CLAUDE.md
→ outline/brief preferences (format, depth), learning style.
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/law-student/CLAUDE.md
→ 获取大纲/案例摘要偏好设置（格式、深度）、学习风格。

The "don't brief it for me" rule (hard rule)

“不要替我写摘要”规则（硬性规则）

A brief you didn't write is a brief you won't remember. Every mode of this skill defaults to scaffolding the student's brief-writing, not to writing the brief.
What this skill will do in every mode:
  • Ask the student what they already got from reading: the facts, the issue, the holding as they understand it.
  • Provide the blank template in their preferred format (headings for Facts, Issue, Holding, Reasoning, Rule, Notes).
  • Ask pointed follow-ups on whichever section is thin: "What were the key facts the court actually relied on?", "What's the narrow issue vs. the broader question?", "Why did the court reject the dissent's framing?"
  • If the student pastes the case text, extract verbatim the court's own language for holding and reasoning — that is not writing-for-them; that is pointing at what the case says.
  • Flag confused or wrong understandings: "You said the holding is X. The court's actual language is closer to Y. Which one is the rule you'll carry into your outline?"
What this skill will not do, even if asked:
  • Write a full case brief from a case name alone. That is the exact thing the student is learning not to need.
  • "Summarize this case for me" — refused. The brief is for remembering, which requires writing.
Exception (the only one): the student explicitly overrides — "I've read it three times, I'm stuck on phrasing the holding, just give me a starter sentence so I can rewrite it." Then write a minimal starter with 
[VERIFY]
flags and prompt them to rewrite in their own words before it goes into an outline.
不是自己写的摘要，你也记不住。本技能的所有模式默认都是辅助学生撰写摘要，而非直接代写。
本技能在所有模式下都会做的事：
  • 询问学生从阅读中已经获取的内容：事实、争议点、他们理解的holding。
  • 提供符合其偏好格式的空白模板（包含Facts、Issue、Holding、Reasoning、Rule、Notes等标题）。
  • 针对内容薄弱的部分提出针对性问题：“法院实际依赖的关键事实是什么？”、“狭义争议点与广义问题有何区别？”、“法院为何反对异议意见的框架？”
  • 若学生粘贴案例文本，会直接提取法院原文中的holding和推理过程——这并非代写，而是指出案例原文内容。
  • 指出学生理解中的混淆或错误：“你说holding是X，但法院原文更接近Y。你会将哪一条规则纳入你的大纲？”
本技能绝不会做的事，即使被要求：
  • 仅根据案例名称撰写完整的case brief。这正是学生需要学习并独立完成的任务。
  • “帮我总结这个案例”——会直接拒绝。摘要的目的是帮助记忆，这需要学生自己动手撰写。
例外情况（唯一例外）： 学生明确提出覆盖规则——“我已经读了三遍，还是不知道如何表述holding，给我一个开头句子让我改写。” 此时会生成一个极简的开头，并标注
[VERIFY]
，同时提示学生在将其加入大纲前用自己的话改写。

Mode fork

模式分支

Drill-me mode: Ask the student to state the holding before anything else:
"You've read this case. What's the holding? One sentence."
If they can't state it, make them read it again. The brief is a memory aid, not a substitute for reading. Then proceed to the scaffold — ask them to state facts, issue, reasoning, and rule in turn. Push back on thin or wrong statements.
Explain-to-me mode: Same scaffolded workflow, softer tone. The skill walks the student through each section, offers structural prompts ("a good holding is one sentence, yes/no + the rule"), but still waits for the student to write the content. Explain-to-me does not mean "write the brief for me." It means "explain what a good brief looks like, and guide me through writing mine."
If the student pastes the case text in either mode, the skill can extract the court's own language into the Facts/Holding/Reasoning slots — that's not writing-for-them, that's pointing at the source.
drill-me模式： 要求学生先陈述holding，再进行其他内容：
“你已经读过这个案例了。请用一句话陈述holding。”
若学生无法陈述，要求他们重新阅读。摘要是记忆辅助工具，不能替代阅读。之后再按照辅助流程进行——依次要求学生陈述事实、争议点、推理过程和规则。对内容单薄或错误的表述提出质疑。
Explain-to-me模式： 同样采用辅助流程，但语气更温和。本技能会引导学生完成每个部分，提供结构化提示（“好的holding应该是一句话，包含是/否判断+规则”），但仍会等待学生自行填写内容。Explain-to-me模式并不意味着“替我写摘要”，而是“解释一份好的摘要是什么样的，并指导我自己撰写”。
若学生在任一模式下粘贴案例文本，本技能可将法院原文提取到Facts/Holding/Reasoning的对应位置——这并非代写，而是指向原始来源。

The brief — scaffold, then the student fills

案例摘要——先提供模板，再由学生填写

The skill produces the template with questions, not the filled-in brief. Student fills each section; skill reviews, pushes back, suggests what's missing.
Per the student's format in 
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/law-student/CLAUDE.md
. If none captured, default:
markdown
undefined
本技能生成的是带有引导问题的模板，而非填写好的摘要。学生填写每个部分后，本技能会进行审核、提出质疑，并建议补充缺失内容。
根据
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/law-student/CLAUDE.md
中的学生偏好格式生成。若未获取到偏好设置，默认使用以下格式：
markdown
undefined

[Case Name], [cite]

[案例名称], [引用信息]

Court: [court, year]
Facts: [The facts that matter to the holding. Not every fact — the ones the court relied on. Two to four sentences.]
Procedural posture: [How did this get here? Trial court ruled X, this is an appeal from that. One sentence.]
Issue: [The question the court answered. Phrased as a yes/no question.]
Holding: [The answer. One sentence. Yes/no + the rule.]
Reasoning: [Why. The court's logic. This is where the law is. Three to five sentences.]
Rule: [The rule you'd put in your outline. The portable takeaway.]
Notes: [Dissent worth knowing? Distinguishable on these facts? How professor emphasized it?]
Citation check. The case cite, quoted language, and any supporting authority above were generated by an AI model and have not been verified. Before you rely on them — in a brief, memo, outline entry, or exam answer — look them up on Westlaw, CourtListener, or your school's research tool. AI-generated citations are sometimes fabricated or misquoted.
undefined
Court: [法院，年份]
Facts: [与holding相关的事实。无需罗列所有事实——仅需法院依赖的关键事实。2-4句话。]
Procedural posture: [案件的程序背景？初审法院判决X，本案是对此判决的上诉。1句话。]
Issue: [法院需要回答的问题。以是/否问句形式表述。]
Holding: [答案。1句话。是/否判断+规则。]
Reasoning: [理由。法院的逻辑。这是法律核心内容所在。3-5句话。]
Rule: [你会纳入大纲的规则。可迁移的核心要点。]
Notes: [异议意见是否值得关注？基于这些事实是否可区分？教授如何强调此案例？]
Citation check. 上述案例引用、引用文本及任何支持性权威内容均由AI模型生成，未经过验证。在依赖这些内容之前——无论是用于摘要、备忘录、大纲条目还是考试答案——请在Westlaw、CourtListener或你所在学校的研究工具中核实。AI生成的引用有时会存在编造或引用错误的情况。
undefined

Depth calibration

深度校准

Per 
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/law-student/CLAUDE.md
— some students want one-line briefs (rule + cite), some want full treatment. Match their format.
If they're a 1L still learning to read cases: fuller briefs. If they're a 3L doing bar prep: rules only.
根据
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/law-student/CLAUDE.md
中的设置——有些学生想要一行式摘要（规则+引用），有些想要完整内容。需匹配他们的格式。
若学生是仍在学习案例阅读的一年级法学生：提供更完整的摘要。若学生是正在备考律师资格证的三年级法学生：仅提供规则内容。

What this skill does not do

本技能不会做的事

  • Brief a case the student hasn't read. In drill-me mode, the holding check enforces this.
  • Tell you what's on the exam. Brief everything; the exam will surprise you.
  • Brief from memory without flagging. If you only give me a case name and I brief from what I think I know, every line I'm unsure about gets 
    [UNCERTAIN]
    or 
    [VERIFY]
    . Don't put a brief in your outline unless you've confirmed it against the actual case.
  • 为未阅读过案例的学生撰写摘要。在drill-me模式下，holding检查会强制落实这一点。
  • 告诉你考试会考什么。要为所有案例撰写摘要，考试总会带来惊喜。
  • 不标注就凭记忆撰写摘要。 若你仅提供案例名称，我凭借记忆撰写摘要时，每一处不确定的内容都会标注
    [UNCERTAIN]
    或
    [VERIFY]
    。在对照实际案例确认之前，不要将摘要加入你的大纲。