Skip to content
CasePrompts
Try free

AI prompts for workers’ comp claimant lawyers

Compensability, the authorized-treatment trail, work restrictions, MMI and impairment language, and AWW evidence. Every prompt on this page carries that emphasis. Pick a workflow and add only the details the assignment needs, using neutral labels where possible.

Lens version
1
Status
Published
Review scope
Internal workflow framing; no independent legal review recorded

Report a correction

Open the builder with this lensReview practice workflows

Start with a workflow

Build a chronologyMedical records
Treatment trail with work-status languageAuthorizations, restrictions, MMI, and impairment ratings, verbatim and dated.Open in the builder
Extract from the recordDeposition transcript
Pull notice and course-of-employment admissionsWhat the employer's witnesses conceded about the accident and reporting.Open in the builder
Find contradictionsMixed / full case record
Track the carrier's shifting denial reasonsDivergences across the adjuster file, dual-cited.Open in the builder
Interrogate the fileMixed / full case record
Cited Q&A across the comp fileBenefits-relevant gaps flagged in every answer.Open in the builder

A complete example prompt

The Workers' compensation — claimant lens adds this practice context to every template: This work product supports the injured worker's claim: establishing compensability, the authorized-treatment trail, work restrictions, and the wage evidence the benefits turn on.

Here is one complete example: the “Treatment trail with work-status language” workflow with medical records as the source. Run it on your own file in Ask your files, or copy it into an AI tool your firm approves.

Preview and copy the complete example
Treatment trail with work-status language · Medical records

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 claimant's workers' compensation counsel in a workers' compensation claim matter. The attached production is the medical records of Alex Morgan. The incident at issue occurred on January 15, 2025. The injuries and conditions that matter are: course and scope; notice; work restrictions; benefits. This work product supports the injured worker's claim: establishing compensability, the authorized-treatment trail, work restrictions, and the wage evidence the benefits turn on.

INSTRUCTIONS:
Build a complete treatment chronology covering every encounter in the production — visits, imaging, procedures, therapy sessions, and telephone encounters. For each encounter capture: provider and facility; date of service; presenting complaints in the patient's words where recorded; objective findings; diagnoses exactly as stated in the record (do not supply diagnoses or codes the record does not state); treatment rendered; medications; work or activity restrictions; and the next-step plan. Separately and explicitly:
1. Flag every gap in treatment longer than 30 days.
2. Flag every reference to symptoms, injuries, or treatment pre-dating January 15, 2025.
3. Collect every causation statement — any provider language attributing or declining to attribute a condition to the incident — verbatim.

In this engagement, additionally: Track the authorized-treatment trail precisely — referrals, authorizations, denials, and delays — and capture work-status notes, restrictions, MMI findings, and impairment ratings verbatim with dates.

TEMPLATE — format your output exactly as follows:
## Chronology
| Date | Provider / facility | Complaints | Findings | Diagnoses (as stated) | Treatment / meds | Restrictions | Cite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
## Treatment gaps (> 30 days)
| Gap | Last visit before (cite) | First visit after (cite) |
|---|---|---|
## Pre-existing / prior history references
| Date | Provider | Verbatim reference | Cite |
|---|---|---|---|
## Causation statements (verbatim)
| Date | Provider | Exact language | Cite |
|---|---|---|---|

EVIDENCE REQUIREMENTS:
For every entry, cite provider, date of service, and the page or Bates number of the source record. Record diagnoses and causation language exactly as written — never normalize, upgrade, or infer a diagnosis, and never supply an ICD code the record does not contain. If a record page is illegible or an encounter is referenced but missing from the production, list it under a final heading "Missing or illegible — request from provider" rather than guessing at its contents.

Unless a section above specifies its own marker, write "not found in the record" wherever the provided record does not support a requested finding. 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.

Every template in the library assembles like this with the Workers' compensation — claimant lens: open the builder and add only the assignment details needed, using neutral labels where possible, or read the Attorney's Guide to AI Prompting for the method behind it.

What this lens changes in each task

Extract from the record
Prioritize testimony establishing the accident arose out of and in the course of employment, prompt reporting, and employer knowledge — plus every statement about restrictions and ability to work.
Build a chronology
Track the authorized-treatment trail precisely — referrals, authorizations, denials, and delays — and capture work-status notes, restrictions, MMI findings, and impairment ratings verbatim with dates.
Find contradictions
Focus on divergence between the employer/carrier's account of notice and authorization and what the records show, and on shifting reasons for denial across the file.
Summarize the record
Organize around what the benefits turn on: compensability evidence, current work status and restrictions, treatment authorized versus requested, and average weekly wage support.
Draft from the record
Write toward the statutory touchpoints — notice, causal connection, restrictions, wage loss — with provider and employer language quoted verbatim.
Interrogate the file
Whenever an answer touches benefits, state whether the record documents the supporting wage, status, or authorization evidence and where; missing documentation is follow-up work, so flag it.

Common questions

How can workers’ comp claimant attorneys use AI on medical records?

Workers’ compensation claimant attorneys can use AI to trace the authorized-treatment trail: referrals, authorizations, denials, and delays, plus work-status notes, restrictions, MMI findings, and impairment ratings quoted with dates. Each entry cites the record page. The attorney or paralegal checks the chronology against the file before relying on it at a hearing.

Can AI track a carrier’s reasons for denying a workers’ comp claim?

Yes. AI can list each reason the employer or carrier gave for a denial across letters, adjuster notes, and testimony, citing every source and noting where the reasons shift. In workers’ compensation claimant work, the attorney reviews each cited passage in context and decides how the record bears on the benefits at issue.

What should a workers’ comp AI prompt check about wage evidence?

A workers’ compensation prompt should ask whether the record documents average weekly wage, work status, and authorization evidence, and where each appears. Missing documentation should be flagged as follow-up work rather than estimated. The claimant’s attorney verifies every cited figure against payroll records and decides what to request before a hearing.

Template guides

Read the general guide for each workflow below. To apply the Workers' compensation — claimant context to your own facts, use the builder actions above.

Prompt library