Legal Memo Drafting Assistant
Draft structured, objective IRAC-format legal memoranda — question presented, brief answer, statement of facts, IRAC discussion, and a practical recommendation.
The business needs an answer to a legal question by end of day, and a proper memo means chasing down statutes, checking for conflicting case law, and structuring an analysis that a non-lawyer can actually act on — not just a paragraph of hedging.
Who it's for: in-house counsel answering business questions quickly, law firm associates drafting internal memos, compliance teams documenting legal risk assessments, paralegals doing first-pass legal research, legal operations teams standardizing memo format across a team
Example
"Draft a memo on whether we can terminate this distribution agreement early" → A structured memorandum: precise question presented, a 2-paragraph brief answer, an objective statement of facts, full IRAC analysis with arguments for and against, and a conclusion with a risk rating and recommended next steps
CLAUDE.md Template
New here? 3-minute setup guide → | Already set up? Copy the template below.
npx ccplaybooks add legal-memo-drafting# Legal Memo Drafting Assistant
## Your Role
You draft professional legal memoranda for an internal legal team — objective, structured analysis of a legal question grounded in the applicable statutes, case law, and regulatory guidance.
**This supports legal work; it does not replace legal judgment.** Every memo must be reviewed by a qualified lawyer before anyone acts on it.
**Citation discipline is non-negotiable.** Citing statutes or cases from memory carries real hallucination risk — laws get amended, citations get misremembered, and case names get invented. If you have access to a legal research tool or MCP connector, use it to verify every citation before it goes in the memo. If you don't, say so explicitly in the memo: flag that citations require verification against the current state of the law before reliance.
---
Get new playbooks like this one
One email a week with new Claude Code workflows. Free, like everything here.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
What This Does
Turns a legal question into a professionally structured memorandum — the kind an in-house legal team uses to answer business stakeholders, document risk, or build the record before a decision. Follows the standard memo architecture: header, question presented, brief answer, statement of facts, IRAC discussion, and a conclusion with a practical recommendation.
Quick Start
Step 1: Create a Project Folder
mkdir legal-memos && cd legal-memos
Step 2: Download the Template
Click Download above, then:
mv ~/Downloads/CLAUDE.md ./
Step 3: Draft a Memo
claude
Then ask: "Draft a memo on whether [specific legal question]"
Memo Structure
| Section | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Header | To/From/Date/Re, privilege designation |
| Question Presented | One narrow, fact-laden, neutral formulation of the issue |
| Brief Answer | 1–3 paragraphs — direct conclusion, no citations |
| Statement of Facts | Objective recitation, no legal conclusions |
| Discussion | Full IRAC analysis per issue — Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion |
| Conclusion & Recommendation | Risk rating, practical next steps, caveats |
Tips & Best Practices
- Objectivity over advocacy. A memo presents arguments for and against — it's not a brief written to win. The conclusion should follow from the analysis, not the other way around.
- Verify every citation. Citing statutes or case law from memory risks hallucination — laws get amended and case names get misremembered. If you have a legal research tool connected, use it to verify each citation before it goes in the memo. If you don't, the memo should say so explicitly.
- Present conflicting authority honestly. When precedent is genuinely split, show both lines and note which is more recent or dominant — collapsing a real conflict into false consensus is one of the most common ways memos mislead.
- Match length to complexity. A single simple question deserves 2–4 pages, not 15. Padding a short answer to look thorough undermines trust in the whole document.
- Distinguish facts from conclusions. The Statement of Facts should never smuggle in a legal conclusion like "breached the contract" — that's for the Discussion section to establish.
Limitations
- This produces a working internal document, not a formal legal opinion — every memo needs review by a qualified lawyer before anyone relies on it
- Citation accuracy depends entirely on either a connected legal research tool or documents the user supplies — without one, treat every citation as needing independent verification
- Jurisdiction-specific: the memo structure (IRAC) is broadly portable, but the substantive law cited must match the jurisdiction actually governing the question