本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

answer-to-harassment-complaint

Drafts a defendant employer's Answer to a workplace harassment complaint. Responds paragraph-by-paragraph to allegations, asserts Faragher-Ellerth and other affirmative defenses, and follows federal/state civil procedure rules. Use when defending employers at the pleadings phase against Title VII, state FEHA, or other employment harassment claims.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md5.1 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。

Answer to Harassment Complaint

Drafts a responsive Answer on behalf of a defendant employer in employment harassment litigation, preserving all available defenses and establishing the client's factual and legal positions.

Prerequisites

Gather before drafting:

  • Complaint — all numbered paragraphs, exhibits, referenced documents
  • Anti-harassment policies — written policy, training records, complaint procedures, acknowledgment forms
  • Investigation file — internal investigation triggered by plaintiff's complaint (or absence thereof)
  • Personnel records — plaintiff's employment dates, title, reporting chain, disciplinary history
  • Alleged harasser's records — supervisory authority, tangible action authority, employment status
  • EEOC charge — filing date, charge scope, right-to-sue letter date

Quick Start

  1. Mirror complaint caption exactly (court, case number, parties) → title: DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
  2. Respond to each numbered paragraph (admit / deny / lack knowledge)
  3. Assert all applicable affirmative defenses as separately numbered paragraphs
  4. Add prayer for relief and signature block with certificate of service

Core Workflow

Paragraph-by-Paragraph Responses

For each numbered paragraph use one response:

ResponseWhen to Use
AdmitIndisputable facts: corporate existence, employment dates, policy existence
DenyFalse allegations or legal conclusions ("severe," "pervasive," "unwelcome")
Lack sufficient knowledgePlaintiff's subjective experiences, statements outside defendant's presence — use sparingly for facts defendant should know

Drafting rules:

  • Parse compound paragraphs — admit true portions, deny the rest specifically
  • Document references: admit existence, deny plaintiff's characterization
  • Never blanket-deny paragraphs containing mixed assertions
  • Keep responses consistent with documents to be produced in discovery

Affirmative Defenses

Assert each in a separately numbered paragraph. Waiver applies to unpleaded defenses.

DefenseKey Elements
Failure to state a claimConduct not severe/pervasive enough to alter employment conditions; isolated incidents or petty slights insufficient
Faragher-Ellerth (supervisor, no tangible action)(1) Employer exercised reasonable care: written policy, training, complaint channels, prompt investigation; (2) Plaintiff unreasonably failed to use available procedures
Statute of limitationsEEOC: 180 days (non-deferral) / 300 days (deferral) per discrete act; suit: 90 days from right-to-sue; state: 1–3 years [VERIFY state-specific period]
Continuing violationDiscrete acts outside limitations not recoverable under continuing-violation theory
No protected-characteristic nexusConduct not because of sex, race, or other protected class
Failure to exhaustClaims outside EEOC charge scope are unexhausted
No compensable damagesNo cognizable harm, or harm from independent intervening factors
Failure to mitigatePlaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to reduce damages
After-acquired evidencePost-separation misconduct warranting discharge [VERIFY jurisdiction's application to harassment]
Release/waiverAssert if settlement agreement or release exists
Statutory coverageEmployer below Title VII / state-law employee threshold

Include reservation to assert additional defenses as discovery proceeds (receptiveness varies by jurisdiction).

Prayer for Relief

  • Dismissal with prejudice
  • Judgment for defendant on all claims
  • Costs of suit
  • Attorney's fees (prevailing defendant where frivolous [VERIFY standard]; contractual basis if applicable)
  • Such other relief as the court deems just

Signature Block & Service

Include attorney name, bar number, firm, address, phone, email, filing date. Attach Certificate of Service with date and method of service on plaintiff's counsel.

Pitfalls and Checks

  • Supervisor vs. co-worker: Faragher-Ellerth applies only when alleged harasser is a supervisor with no tangible employment action; co-worker harassment uses a negligence standard
  • Tangible employment action: Discharge, demotion, or undesirable reassignment defeats Faragher-Ellerth — pivot to other defenses
  • No argument in pleading: The Answer is not a brief — strike editorial commentary
  • Internal consistency: Confirm paragraph responses align with asserted affirmative defenses before filing
  • Local rules: Verify page limits, font, spacing, margins, and line-numbering for the specific court
  • Amendment: Track post-filing facts that may require an amended answer; check deadline for amendment as of right

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