Given Anthropic’s Claude.ai’s impressive ability to handle .pdf uploads and complex prompts, it seemed only right to upload public efiled court briefing, put the AI-created output in comparative table form, and see how things would go.

Overall? Pretty darn good!

Check out how well (with a couple of misses) Claude followed my instructions on how to outline the appellant, appellee, and two amicus briefs in a case to be argued at the Michigan Supreme Court in a few weeks. (My added personal notations to the table should be self-evident.)

What are we looking at? The above .pdf is (most of) the charted briefing filed in the Michigan Supreme Court in People v Daniel Albert Loew (164133).

[N.b., I did not touch Watson Township’s amicus brief because it is a horrible scan. And 147 pages. (Not ePleasing at all).]

The four original briefs total 126 pages. The comparative table with output created by Claude is a manageable 29 pages. (As you can see, I went through a lot of the output to verify it against the original briefs. I did not fly-speck every representation but for those I did, I noted whether it was verified or off.)

How was the table created?

I . . .

• Downloaded the .pdf briefing files from the public court website.
• Working one file at a time, uploaded a brief to the Claude website, and applied an uber-complex prompt.
• Copied and pasted Claude’s output into a 5-column table I created on a separate Word file. (Used Open Sans 11 pt font, single spaced, with 8 pt spacing after paragraphs.)

What’s the complex prompt? So glad you are curious to know!

Draft an outline of the attached court brief which follows this format and uses these labels.

1.0 Case name(s):
1.1 Court name:
1.2 Docket (or file) number(s):
1.3 Names of Court of Appeals judges (if any):
1.4 Name of Court of Claims judge (if any):
1.5 Name(s) of Circuit Court judge and county (if any):
1.6 Brief title:
1.7 Date brief filed:
1.8 Name of attorney(s) who signed the brief

2.0 Statement of facts or counterstatement of facts (list the brief page number(s) in parenthesis):
2.1 Relationship or status of parties (include parties’ full names):
2.2 Legally relevant facts (facts tending to prove or disprove an issue before the court):
2.3 Procedurally significant facts (set out the (a) cause of action, (b) the requested relief, and (c) any raised defenses):
2.4 Acronym(s) defined:
2.5 Important constitutional provisions at issue (and include the brief page number(s) and url reference links in parenthesis):
2.6 Important laws listed (and include the brief page number(s) and url reference links in parenthesis):
2.7 Important regulation names and citations at issue (and include the brief page number(s) and url reference links in parenthesis):
2.8 Important case law names and citations at issue (and include the brief page number(s) and url reference links in parenthesis):
2.9 Important dictionary definition terms at issue (list the brief page number(s) in parenthesis):

3.0 Procedural history (the case disposition in the lower courts):
3.1 The lower court(s) decisions:
3.2 Any awarded damages:
3.3 Who appealed and why:

4.0 Questions presented or statement of questions (list the brief page number(s) in parenthesis):
4.1 Brief answer to each legal question:
4.1.1 The disputed point(s) of law:
4.1.2 The key case facts related to the disputed point(s) of law (legally relevant facts):

5.0 Party or amicus arguments:

6.0 Applicable law(s) or legal principle(s): (The rule(s) of law that the brief claims determine the parties’ substantive rights. The rule(s) of law could be based on constitution, statute, case law, regulation, or court rule. The rule(s) or legal principle(s) may be expressly stated in the opinion or it may be implied.)(And include url reference links.)

7.0 Reasoning or analysis:
7.1 Explain the way the brief applies the rules/legal principles to the particular facts. This includes syllogistic application of rules and policy arguments used to justify its position (why the argument is socially desirable).
7.2 List the brief’s headings and subheadings in text. Use sentence-case capitalization.
7.3 Note any image(s), figure(s), table(s), or charts in the brief.

8.0 List every time the brief accuses another party, court, or judge of misstating or misunderstanding the record, the evidence, a fact, the proper legal standard, or the law (list the brief page number(s) in parenthesis):

9.0 Party or amicus conclusion and relief sought (list the brief page number(s) in parenthesis):

10.0 Sentiment, emotion, and tone
10.1 List the sentiment for the brief.
10.2 List the emotion for the brief.
10.3 List the tone for the brief.

11.0 Additional comments or impressions: (Is the reasoning sound and, if so, how? Is the reasoning contradictory and, if so, how? What could be the decision’s political, economic, or social effects, if any?)

Now bold the labels.

As a matter of personal preference, you can see I added a column on the left to include the Michigan Supreme Court’s case summary and, further down, the questions the Court ordered to be briefed. (An especially helpful approach because, as this table shows, not all the parties/brief filers followed what the Court ordered.)

Let me know if you give this a try. I’d love to hear how it went!

Looking to tweak a complex prompt or process for your office or chambers? Keep me in mind!