Mediation Position Summary
A neutral-tone summary of the record organized for a mediation statement: liability, damages, what's genuinely disputed, and what both sides already agree on.
What is an AI mediation position summary prompt?
It is a CITE prompt that asks an AI tool to summarize case records. A neutral-tone summary of the record organized for a mediation statement: liability, damages, what's genuinely disputed, and what both sides already agree on. You fill in three fields; the Evidence block requires a page:line, Bates, page, or timestamp cite for every finding so a person can check each one against the record.
Sample prompt
Synthetic data
Synthetic example: The names, dates, case details, and issues below are fictional CasePrompts sample values, not client data or evidence from a real matter. They demonstrate the prompt format, not the accuracy of any AI model's output.
Preview the complete sample prompt
CONTEXT: You are a litigation support analyst assisting insurance staff counsel in a first-party property (hurricane claim) matter, preparing materials for mediation. The attached materials are the case record. The issues that matter are: cause of roof damage; scope of covered repairs; mitigation. INSTRUCTIONS: Summarize the record in the register a mediator expects — factual, measured, persuasive through specificity rather than advocacy: 1. LIABILITY — what the record establishes about how the events occurred and each party's role. 2. DAMAGES — what the record documents: treatment, costs, losses, and their current state of proof. 3. GENUINELY DISPUTED — issues where the record contains real conflicting evidence, presented even-handedly with both sides' support. 4. EFFECTIVELY UNDISPUTED — facts no party has contradicted on this record. Resist advocacy adjectives throughout; the facts carry the weight or they don't. TEMPLATE — format your output exactly as follows: ## Liability [narrative paragraphs, each factual statement cited] ## Damages | Category | What the record documents | State of proof | Cite | |---|---|---|---| ## Genuinely disputed | Issue | One side's evidence (cite) | Other side's evidence (cite) | |---|---|---| ## Effectively undisputed Bullet list with cites. 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. Maintain the neutral register throughout — no adjectives doing argument's work. Present disputed issues with both sides' record support; resolution is for the mediation, not the summary. If a damages category is asserted but undocumented in this record, say so plainly. 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.
Through the Civil / insurance defense lens
Organize around exposure: what currently supports each element of the claim, what undercuts it, and what remains unproven on this record — in a neutral, evaluative register suitable for carrier reporting.
Through the Commercial litigation lens
Organize by claim element and contract provision: what the documents establish, what remains genuinely disputed, and what the damages record actually quantifies.
Through the Criminal defense lens
Organize by element of each charged offense, noting which elements rest on a single witness, where corroboration is absent, and where the record is silent.
Through the Employment litigation lens
Organize around the decision at issue: the stated reasons, the documentation that predates versus postdates the decision, comparator evidence, and policy compliance.
Through the Family law lens
Organize around the governing factors as the record speaks to them, in a measured register — the likely audience is a judge or guardian ad litem, not a jury.
Through the Medical malpractice — defense lens
Organize around the defense posture: what the chart documents the provider knew and did, where the plaintiff's account departs from the record, and what remains unproven on causation.
Through the Medical malpractice — plaintiff lens
Organize around the elements: duty, the standard of care as the record states it, deviation evidence, causation, and damages — flagging where expert foundation exists and where it is still missing.
Through the Personal injury — plaintiff lens
Surface testimony supporting each liability element and each category of damages, and flag favorable concessions prominently rather than burying them in sequence.
Through the Probate & estate litigation lens
Organize around the element the matter turns on — testamentary capacity, undue influence, or breach of fiduciary duty — in a measured register written for a probate judge, not a jury.
Through the Prosecution lens
Organize by charge and element, rating the strength of proof per element as resting on multiple independent sources, a single source, or inference.
Through the Workers' compensation — claimant lens
Organize around what the benefits turn on: compensability evidence, current work status and restrictions, treatment authorized versus requested, and average weekly wage support.
Through the Workers' compensation — employer/carrier lens
Organize around exposure: what supports compensability, what undercuts it, the authorized-care record, and the return-to-work evidence — in a register suitable for carrier reporting.
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"
Verification checklist
- Mixed / full case record: open each cited page:line, Bates, page, or timestamp location and confirm it supports the finding. The prompt asks: “For every finding, identify the source document by name and cite page:line for transcripts, timestamps for audio/video, and Bates/page for documents.”
- Re-check every item labelled “not found in the record” against the full source; these labels flag gaps or judgment calls for a person to resolve, not proof of absence.
- A human reviewer must verify every material statement and citation against the source record before relying on or sharing the output.
Pro tip The 'effectively undisputed' section sets the floor for the joint session — lead with it.
Related verification workflow
Related templates
IME / CME Report Summarizer
Distill an IME or CME report: findings, concessions, the records the examiner says they reviewed — and the gap between that list and what actually exists.
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.
Plain-English Client Summary
A client-friendly status summary of the record at an eighth-grade reading level — jargon translated, honest about what's unresolved, nothing overpromised.