--- name: casesim-client-q-and-a-prep description: Use when an attorney needs to prepare a client for a deposition, witness statement, mediation session, or court testimony. Coaches the attorney through building a question bank from the case file, scoring question difficulty, running roleplay rehearsal (with Louis playing opposing counsel), critiquing answer quality, and running a final stress-test under interruption and time pressure. Covers privilege boundaries, conflicting evidence, and personal weak points. Produces a question bank, answer-coaching notes, and rehearsal log. license: MIT metadata: id: casesim.client-Q-and-A-prep category: casesim jurisdictions: [__multi__] priority: P1 intent: [litigation-prep, deposition, witness-prep, mediation] related: [casesim-cross-examination-rehearsal, casesim-judge-bench-perspective, casesim-opposing-counsel-simulator, casesim-fact-pattern-builder, academy-litigation-game-coach] source: Louis — HAQQ Legal AI (github.com/sboghossian/mini-claude-for-legal) version: "1.0" --- # Client Q&A Prep — Deposition, Witness Statement, and Mediation Coaching ## When to use this Invoke when: - An attorney is preparing a client for a deposition - A client is submitting a witness statement and needs to be ready for follow-up questioning - A party is attending a mediation where they will be questioned by the mediator or opposing counsel - A client is testifying in court or before a tribunal (civil or commercial) - An attorney wants to rehearse a client's narrative before a settlement negotiation **Jurisdictional applicability:** deposition procedures vary significantly by forum. The US adversarial deposition model differs from Lebanese civil procedure (where pre-trial witness examination is limited), DIFC arbitration (where witness statements are primary and cross-examination at hearing is more constrained), and KSA Commercial Court practice. Calibrate the coaching intensity and procedure to the actual forum. ## Inputs | Input | Required | Notes | |---|---|---| | Case summary / key facts | Yes | Who are the parties, what is the dispute, what happened? | | Client's role | Yes | Fact witness, party witness, expert witness | | Forum | Yes | Deposition (US), DIFC arbitration, Lebanese court, mediation, etc. | | Key documents | Recommended | Contracts, emails, prior statements, relevant records | | Privilege scope | Recommended | Attorney-client and work-product boundaries for this client | | Known weak points | Optional | Prior testimony, social media, conflicts of interest, prior inconsistencies | | Opposing counsel profile | Optional | Firm, known style, prior cross-examination patterns | ## Process ### Step 1: Build the Question Bank From the case file, Louis constructs a question bank organized by topic: **Opening narrative questions** (always appear; shape how the client frames themselves): - "Tell me about yourself and your role at [company]." - "Walk me through your involvement in [key event]." - "How long have you worked there, and who did you report to?" **Key fact questions** (derived from the specific facts): - What the client directly observed vs. was told vs. inferred - Source of knowledge for each material fact ("how do you know that?") - Documents the client authored, received, forwarded, or was copied on **Conflicting evidence questions** (where the record shows inconsistency): - Prior emails that seem to contradict the client's current position - Statements made in earlier depositions or declarations - Social media posts or external communications relevant to the matter **Documents under attack** (specific documents likely to be put to the client): - For each: who drafted it, what does it mean, what was the client's state of mind **Privilege boundary questions**: - Questions designed to pierce attorney-client privilege (indirect approaches) - Questions designed to discover work product - The client must know how to respond without inadvertently waiving privilege (redirect to counsel, do not explain privileged communications) **Personal weak points**: - Prior testimony in other proceedings - Social media activity during the relevant period - Conflicts of interest or financial interests relevant to the case - Credibility vulnerabilities (prior conviction, prior inconsistent statement on an unrelated matter) ### Step 2: Score Question Difficulty Each question is scored 1–5: - **1 (Routine):** Uncontroversial facts the client knows well - **2 (Attention required):** Facts requiring precise language; small errors matter - **3 (Significant):** Documents or events where the record could be read multiple ways - **4 (High-risk):** Questions designed to create or exploit inconsistency; privilege boundary proximity - **5 (Critical):** Questions that go directly to the heart of liability or credibility; a bad answer here is case-changing Focus rehearsal time on Level 3–5 questions. ### Step 3: Roleplay Rehearsal Louis plays opposing counsel. Behavioral modes: - **Baseline:** professional, methodical questioning as a competent but not aggressive counsel - **Pressure mode:** interrupts frequently, asks compound questions, uses silence as a tool - **Aggressive mode:** raised stakes, leading questions, attempts to get the client to commit to damaging positions The attorney directs which mode to use and when to escalate. **Coaching focus areas** during rehearsal: - **Rambling:** client gives too much information; answers go beyond what was asked - **Speculation:** client answers what they think must have happened rather than what they know - **Volunteering:** client introduces new information that was not asked for - **Imprecision:** client uses approximations ("around," "maybe," "I think") on facts that are documentable - **Hedging when clarity is needed:** over-qualified answers on simple documented facts look evasive ### Step 4: Critique and Refine After each answer, Louis provides structured feedback: - What was strong (accurate, concise, appropriately limited to knowledge) - What needs adjustment (and why: volunteered, speculative, over-explained, inconsistent with document X) - Suggested rephrase (if the answer structure, not the fact, is the problem) The attorney and client iterate until the answer set is stable. ### Step 5: Stress Test Final rehearsal run: - Full simulated session at speed with time pressure (limited minutes per question set) - Random interruption ("wait — you said earlier… [invented inconsistency]") to test whether the client handles pressure calmly - Back-to-back difficult questions without breaks The attorney reviews the stress-test log and decides whether more prep is needed. ## Output At the end of each session Louis produces: 1. **Question bank** (full list, scored by difficulty, with notes) 2. **Answer coaching notes** (per question: what to say, what to avoid, how to respond to follow-ups) 3. **Rehearsal log** (timestamped record of questions asked, answers given, coaching notes applied) ## Hard limits Louis will not: - Coach a client to fabricate facts or give knowingly false testimony - Help a client conceal documents that are subject to disclosure obligations - Draft scripts that instruct the client to misrepresent their knowledge or memory - Advise a client to hide or destroy evidence If a user request crosses these lines, Louis declines and explains why. ## Jurisdictional notes | Forum | Key preparation differences | |---|---| | US Deposition | Broad scope; counsel can object but client must answer unless privilege; video-recorded; transcript binding | | DIFC / LCIA Arbitration | Witness statement primary; oral examination at hearing is more constrained; tribunal controls the process | | Lebanese Civil Court | Oral examination by judge rather than by parties; preparation focuses on judge's likely questions rather than counsel's | | KSA Commercial Court | Written evidence primary; oral testimony limited; preparation focuses on written statement accuracy | | Mediation | Non-compulsory; client should be prepared for the mediator's probing questions and for informal dialogue with the opposing party | ## Related skills - [[casesim-cross-examination-rehearsal]] - [[casesim-judge-bench-perspective]] - [[casesim-opposing-counsel-simulator]] - [[casesim-fact-pattern-builder]] - [[academy-litigation-game-coach]]