本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

animal-law-case-summary

Produces litigation-grade case summaries for animal law disputes including cruelty/neglect prosecutions, ownership/custody, dangerous animal designations, veterinary malpractice, and service/assistance animal accommodations. Builds exhibit-cited factual timelines, maps evidence to statutory elements, evaluates expert evidence, and assesses remedies with jurisdiction-specific legal research. Use when summarizing animal law cases, analyzing animal cruelty charges, pet custody disputes, dangerous dog hearings, veterinary malpractice claims, or assistance animal accommodation matters. Also trigger for animal forfeiture, bite liability, wildlife possession, or animal-related court filings.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md8.1 KB
  • LICENSE.txt10.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Animal Law Case Summary

Produces structured, evidence-grounded case summaries connecting record citations to legal elements and realistic remedies across criminal, civil, administrative, and regulatory animal law forums.

Prerequisites

Gather before drafting (skip if user says "use defaults" or "just draft"):

  1. Jurisdiction — state, county, forum (state/federal/administrative)
  2. Procedural posture — pre-suit, pleadings, TRO/PI, discovery, SJ, trial, sentencing, appeal
  3. Parties and animal ID — species, breed, microchip/license numbers, current custody
  4. Core record — see minimum record table below
  5. Audience — attorney work product, client-facing, or public/educational
  6. Relief sought

Minimum Record by Matter Type

Matter TypeRequired Documents
Civil litigationComplaint + exhibits, answer/counterclaims, TRO/PI papers, court orders, key discovery, depositions, expert reports, scheduling order
Criminal crueltyCharging instrument, probable cause affidavit, incident reports/body cam, chain-of-custody docs, ACO/shelter logs, vet/necropsy reports
Service/assistance animalLease/HOA/accommodation policy, request + correspondence, verification docs, incident reports, decision records
Veterinary malpracticeComplete vet records (all providers), expert opinions, purchase/adoption docs, loss documentation

Defaults if user doesn't respond: attorney work product audience; posture as stated or inferred; all applicable matter types. Mark unverified content "[VERIFY]."

Workflow

1. Classify and Lock Posture

Classify into applicable archetypes:

  • Criminal cruelty/neglect
  • Civil forfeiture/impound challenge
  • Dangerous animal designation
  • Ownership/title dispute (replevin, conversion, declaratory relief)
  • Veterinary malpractice / consumer protection
  • Landlord-tenant/HOA pet dispute
  • Service animal (ADA Title III) / assistance animal (FHA) accommodation
  • Wildlife/exotics possession and permitting
  • Agricultural animal welfare enforcement
  • Animal-related torts (bite, nuisance, premises liability)

Write a caption block: court/agency, case number, judge/ALJ, filing date, next date.

Critical: never collapse allegations into findings. Identify current animal custody. Surface all deadlines — dangerous dog appeals can be 5–10 days [VERIFY]. Check for "best interest" statutes (e.g., CA Fam. Code § 2605) [VERIFY].

2. Build Factual Timeline

Chronological timeline with exhibit-level citations. Per event: date/time, actor, source (document + pinpoint cite), disputed accounts. Use neutral descriptions (body condition scores, not conclusory characterizations). Track both chain of title (ownership) and chain of care (maintenance, medical, bonding). Include exculpatory facts.

3. Map Claims to Elements and Evidence

Per claim, charge, or violation:

ComponentDetail
Legal standardStatute + elements
BurdenBRD / preponderance / clear & convincing [VERIFY]
Key disputed elementsMost likely contested element
Supporting evidenceExhibits mapped to each element
WeaknessesGaps or undermining evidence
Anticipated defensesAt least two opposition attack vectors

Jurisdiction-specific checks:

  • Cruelty: mens rea requirement + statutory exemptions (veterinary, agriculture, hunting, research)
  • Dog bite: strict liability vs. negligence; provocation/trespass/assumption-of-risk defenses
  • Accommodation: separate ADA "service animal" (task-trained dog only, 28 C.F.R. § 36.104) from FHA "assistance animal" (broader, 24 C.F.R. § 100.204) — never conflate

4. Verify Governing Law

Every cited authority must be verified or marked [VERIFY].

Key federal frameworks:

FrameworkCitation
Animal Welfare Act7 U.S.C. § 2131 et seq.
Endangered Species Act16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.
ADA Title III (service animals)28 C.F.R. § 36.104, § 36.302(c)
FHA (assistance animals)24 C.F.R. § 100.204; HUD FHEO-2020-01
ACAA (air travel)14 C.F.R. Part 382 [VERIFY]

For state/local law: locate exact cruelty, dangerous dog, and pet custody statutes plus municipal ordinances. Confirm text and effective dates.

5. Analyze Evidence Quality

Per expert/professional witness: qualifications, methods (peer-reviewed?), admissibility (Daubert or Frye [VERIFY]), contested assumptions.

Key checks: vet opinions (full history reviewed?), digital evidence (authenticity, metadata), photos (metadata, fair depiction), necropsy (chain of custody), lay witnesses (distinguish from medical conclusions).

6. Assess Remedies

CategoryConsiderations
OwnershipReplevin, conversion damages, injunctive relief
CriminalPenalties, disposition orders, cost-of-care [VERIFY], ownership bans
Dangerous dogEuthanasia vs. alternatives; stay pending appeal? [VERIFY]
AccommodationInjunctive relief, damages, fees
DamagesMarket value vs. intrinsic/companionship; statutory/punitive; attorney's fees [VERIFY]
CollateralHousing, professional licenses, immigration

Address bond/forfeiture deadlines and settlement leverage tied to animal's current placement.

Output Structure

  1. Overview — 2–3 sentence case description
  2. Parties and Animals — identification, relationships, current custody
  3. Procedural Posture — caption block + status
  4. Key Facts (Timeline) — exhibit-cited chronology
  5. Claims/Charges and Governing Law — element mapping
  6. Evidence Strengths and Weaknesses — candid assessment
  7. Key Disputes — contested issues
  8. Remedies and Risk Assessment — realistic outcomes
  9. Next Steps and Deadlines — action items with dates
  10. Key Takeaways — non-advocacy, action-oriented paragraph

State the animal's legal classification explicitly (property, property-plus, best-interest standard).

Post-Draft Alignment

After delivering the summary, confirm:

  1. Correct case, parties, and procedural posture?
  2. Missing record documents to incorporate?
  3. Sections to expand (remedies, expert critique, timeline)?
  4. Audience and privilege markings correct?

Guidelines

  • Neutrality: distinguish allegations vs. findings vs. stipulations vs. inference throughout
  • Adversarial resilience: identify top 3 client vulnerabilities; at least 2 opposition attack vectors per claim
  • Citation integrity: every factual assertion traceable to a record cite or marked [VERIFY]; no invented authorities
  • Audience calibration: adjust tone, privilege handling, strategic candor by audience
  • Scope: case summary only — not a memo, motion, demand letter, or press statement
  • Privilege: label attorney work product; redact sensitive details in client-facing versions
  • Conflicts: flag dual-role parties (e.g., shelter as both representative and witness)
  • Deadline sensitivity: animal law deadlines can be 5–10 days; always surface and flag uncertainty
  • Property status: always state the animal's legal classification — affects standing, remedies, damages
  • ADA vs. FHA: never conflate service animal (ADA) with assistance animal (FHA)

Required disclaimer on every output:

THIS SUMMARY REQUIRES INDEPENDENT ATTORNEY VERIFICATION OF ALL CITATIONS, LOCAL CODES, AND FACTUAL ASSERTIONS, AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

中国大陆地区法院类案快速检索与《案件检索报告》(DOCX)生成技能。以案件五项要点(案由/法律关系、争议焦点、关键事实、我方诉请与诉讼地位、请求权基础法条)为检索锚点,经一次四问确认即开工(其中**检索地域范围**与**裁判时间范围**为强制选择题,默认范围为「2021年1月1日以后裁判的浙江省范围内的法院案例」,用户点选默认后须回显该范围提示);按**请求权基础、法律关系、案件事实三要素**判定高匹配——用户**指定**检索特定结果的案例时结果相似度计入评分(四要素满分 10 分),用户**未指定**时结果相似度不作为高匹配考虑因素(三要素满分 8 分);r1 判定须**核对法条版本与时间效力**,援引已失效旧法条者不得给满分;以语义向量检索为主召回、精确结构检索为条件兜底,本地脚本加权打分后按「得分率 > 法院层级 > 审判程序 > 裁判日期」排序,并检测**同院同日同标题的重复入库**案件、疑似重复者不占入报名额;截取匹配度最高的 5–10 例类案,逐案调详情核验案号并摘录判词原文,最后直接输出含页脚页码的 DOCX 报告(默认保存至桌面)。全流程人工确认 1 次、检索类调用控制在 2 次召回 + ≤10 次详情以内,报告阶段检索冻结。未指定结果时三要素高匹配而结果相反者亦会入报(逐例标注结果方向),指定结果时结果相反者一律剔除;报告内以两处固定声明披露「未设不利先例定向检索路径」的局限。当用户要求「快速检索类似案例」「找几个正向案例」「快速版案例检索报告」「检索 5 到 10 个类案并出报告」「出一份类案检索报告 docx」时使用。需要四象限归位、反向案例定向检索、补充召回多轮迭代或 14 分制硬软条件精判时,应使用完整版技能「案例检索报告Plus」而非本技能。基于华宇元典法律数据 MCP。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

88查企业风险查询与分析工具 —— 专注于中国大陆企业的法务风险查询与分析,覆盖经营异常、行政处罚、监管措施、被执行人、失信被执行人、司法案件等风险类型。支持公司名称、统一社会信用代码、companyId 三种输入方式,自动完成风险查询并输出结构化风险分析总结。 触发场景:仅当用户意图为查询企业风险/法务风险时触发。包括但不限于:企业风险查询、公司风险、经营异常、行政处罚、监管措施、被执行人、失信被执行人、司法风险、风险扫描、风险评估、企业合规审查、风险报告、XX公司有什么风险、XX公司安全吗、XX公司有没有处罚、XX公司被执行过吗。 不触发场景:纯粹的企业信息查询(如查公司、搜企业、工商信息、注册资本、法人代表、股东结构、专利商标等)不应触发本技能,请使用其他 cha88 系列工具。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Manages Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative deposition workflows — drafting notice topics with reasonable particularity, building examination outlines, defending designees, handling objections, and preserving binding admissions for summary judgment or trial. Use when drafting or responding to 30(b)(6) notices, selecting and preparing designees, building topic-by-topic outlines, or triaging scope and privilege disputes. Trigger keywords: 30(b)(6), corporate representative deposition, topic list, designee, notice analysis, deposition objections, corporate admissions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Guides taking and defending Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative depositions. Drafts topic lists with reasonable particularity, builds examination outlines for binding corporate admissions, analyzes noticed topics for objections, and prepares designees. Use when drafting 30(b)(6) notices, preparing corporate deposition topics, selecting or preparing designees, or defending corporate representative depositions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Drafts FDA 510(k) Premarket Notification submissions demonstrating substantial equivalence under 21 CFR Part 807. Supports Traditional, Special, and Abbreviated pathways. Use when preparing Class II medical device regulatory filings, substantial equivalence analyses, or FDA premarket submissions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Drafts a recordable Abstract of Judgment to create a judgment lien on a debtor's real property. Extracts party names, monetary components, and judgment details from case documents, then applies jurisdiction-specific formatting and certification requirements. Use post-judgment in commercial litigation when enforcing monetary awards, perfecting judgment liens, or preparing lien filings with the county recorder.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

CSlawyer1985 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する