本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

bill-of-costs-on-appeal

Drafts a verified U.S. appellate Bill of Costs itemizing taxable costs under FRAP 39 or state analogs. Trigger when the user needs to prepare, file, or tax appellate costs after judgment, or references FRAP 39, bill of costs on appeal, or appellate cost taxation.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md5.5 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。

Bill of Costs on Appeal

Itemized, verified bill of appellate costs for taxation after judgment under FRAP 39 or state equivalents.

Prerequisites

  • Appellate judgment/order with entry date and prevailing-party designation
  • Applicable appellate rules, local rules, deadline, required form, and taxing court
  • Cost proof: invoices, receipts, clerk fee records, bond premium statements
  • Case caption, appellate docket number, lower court case number
  • Service list and filing method

Quick Start

  1. Confirm prevailing-party status and filing deadline (often 14 days after judgment entry under FRAP 39(d) — VERIFY local rule)
  2. Gather all receipts/invoices; map each to a taxable category
  3. Draft using the workflow below
  4. Attach exhibits and serve on all parties

Workflow

1. Caption and Title

Use the appellate court caption and docket number. Title: "Bill of Costs on Appeal" or the court-required form name.

2. Authority Statement

[Prevailing Party], pursuant to [FRAP 39 / state rule], submits this verified Bill of Costs on Appeal. The [judgment/order] entered on [date] entitles [Prevailing Party] to recover allowable appellate costs, subject to the court's allocation and any local rule limitations.

3. Itemized Costs Table

| # | Category        | Description                      | Date | Units/Rate            | Amount | Rule | Exhibit |
|---|-----------------|----------------------------------|------|-----------------------|--------|------|---------|
| 1 | Record          | Clerk record prep & transmission | —    | pages × rate          | $—     | —    | A       |
| 2 | Transcript      | Reporter transcript for appeal   | —    | pages × rate          | $—     | —    | B       |
| 3 | Briefs/Appendix | Printing or reproduction         | —    | copies × pages × rate | $—     | —    | C       |
| 4 | Filing Fees     | Appellate docketing fee          | —    | N/A                   | $—     | —    | D       |
| 5 | Bond Premium    | Supersedeas or cost bond premium | —    | premium               | $—     | —    | E       |
| 6 | Other           | [If expressly authorized]        | —    | units × rate          | $—     | —    | F       |

Category guidance:

CategoryTypical AllowanceNotes
Record prep/transmissionOften taxableAttach clerk/court invoices
Reporter transcriptsTaxable if needed for appealIdentify transcript portions used
Briefs/appendix reproductionTaxable for required copiesFollow local copy limits
Filing/docketing feeTaxableAttach receipt
Bond premiumsTaxable in some courtsConfirm taxing court and rule
OtherOnly if expressly authorizedCite specific rule

4. Subtotals and Total

Provide subtotals per category and a grand total.

5. Verification

I, [Name], declare under penalty of perjury that I have reviewed the foregoing Bill of Costs; the costs claimed were necessarily incurred in the appeal; the amounts are correct; and the costs are authorized by the applicable rules.

Date: ___  Place: ___
Signature: ______________________
Name and Title: ___

6. Certificate of Service

I certify that on [date], I served this Bill of Costs on all parties via [method], as reflected on the service list.

Signature: ______________________

7. Exhibits

Attach supporting documents as required by local rule (e.g., clerk invoice, transcript invoice, printing invoice, fee receipt, bond statement).

Pitfalls and Checks

  • Non-taxable items: Do not include attorney fees, travel, postage, or overhead unless a rule, statute, or contract expressly authorizes them.
  • Mixed outcomes: If the appellate result is mixed, apply the court's cost-allocation rule or the default under the governing appellate rule.
  • Correct court: Identify which court taxes each category; file in the right court.
  • Exact amounts: All figures must match invoices and receipts exactly.
  • Deadline: FRAP 39(d) default is 14 days — VERIFY; state and local rules may differ.
  • Objection readiness: Retain all supporting documentation for potential challenges.

Key changes made:

  • Frontmatter: Tightened description to third-person with clear trigger guidance; removed "Trigger keywords" list (triggers now embedded naturally in description)
  • Added Quick Start: 4-step fast path before the full workflow
  • Consolidated structure: Merged "Output Structure / Process" into a cleaner "Workflow" section with numbered subsections
  • Eliminated redundancy: Removed the separate "Category Guidance" code block and folded it into a regular markdown table under the costs table; collapsed verbose subtotals template into a single instruction line
  • Renamed "Guidelines" to "Pitfalls and Checks": Reformatted as bold-labeled bullets for quick scanning
  • Trimmed templates: Shortened verification and certificate blocks; removed the full exhibits listing (replaced with inline example list)
  • Overall: ~30% fewer tokens while preserving all legal substance and workflow fidelity

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