--- name: output-partner-memo-style description: Use when Claude must produce a formal legal memorandum for internal law firm distribution, senior counsel review, or partner-level sign-off. Applies to triage memos, full legal opinions, regulatory advice notes, and M&A deal memos across all jurisdictions. Triggers when the audience is a senior lawyer, when the output is a formal written deliverable, or when the request explicitly calls for a memo, opinion, or advice note. license: MIT metadata: id: output.partner-memo-style category: output intent: ["__format__", "memo", "opinion", "partner", "formal"] related: - output-irac-structure - output-inline-citations-with-pinpoints - output-source-attribution-block - output-markdown-legal-doc priority: P0 source: Louis — HAQQ Legal AI (github.com/sboghossian/mini-claude-for-legal) version: "1.0" --- # Partner Memo Style A partner memo is the canonical format for formal legal analysis in a law firm or in-house legal team. It is written for a senior lawyer who has no time to hunt for the conclusion and no tolerance for unsupported assertions. Every element of the format serves a purpose — this skill governs what goes in, in what order, and to what quality standard. ## When to use this Use the partner memo format when: - The output is a formal advice note or legal opinion - The audience is a partner, general counsel, or senior in-house counsel - The matter requires documented reasoning (risk management, audit trail) - The output may be forwarded to a client, regulator, or board Do not use for: - Quick triage answers (use BLUF + 1 paragraph) - Client-facing communications (different register — adapt tone) - Drafting tasks (use [[output-markdown-legal-doc]]) - Mobile-context answers (use [[output-mobile-friendly-short]]) ## Memo structure ### 1. Header block ``` MEMORANDUM TO: [Name / Role] FROM: [Author / AI-assisted: confirm before circulation] DATE: [Date] RE: [Subject — specific, one line] CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED ``` The RE line should name the transaction, matter, or question — never "Legal Analysis." ### 2. Bottom line (one sentence, bold) This is mandatory and must appear before anything else. It answers the question directly. > **The non-compete clause in the Acme Employment Agreement is likely unenforceable as drafted under UAE Federal Decree-Law 33/2021 and would require significant redrafting to withstand challenge.** Do not hedge the bottom line into meaninglessness. If the answer is genuinely uncertain, say: **"This question is currently unsettled under UAE law; the most defensible position is [X], but [Y] remains a live risk."** ### 3. Executive summary (3–5 bullets) A scanning aid for senior readers. Each bullet is one specific finding: - The clause fails the proportionality test on both geography (MENA-wide is excessive) and duration (24 months at the statutory ceiling without justification). - A UAE court has equitable power to reduce, not void, an excessive non-compete — likely outcome is 12-month, UAE-only restriction. - The liquidated damages provision is separately questionable under UAE Civil Code — see Issue 2 below. - Recommendation: redraft before execution; amendments noted at Section 4. ### 4. Full analysis Apply [[output-irac-structure]] per issue. Number issues if more than one. Use H2 headings: `## Issue 1: Enforceability of the Non-Compete` `## Issue 2: Liquidated Damages` Each issue section: Issue → Rule (with full citations per [[output-inline-citations-with-pinpoints]]) → Application → Conclusion. ### 5. Sources End-list all authorities cited. See [[output-source-attribution-block]] for the exact format. Include: - All statutes and regulations cited - All cases cited, with pin-cites - Any secondary sources or internal knowledge base references ### 6. Open issues A bullet list of questions that could not be resolved on the available facts: - We have not seen the full contract — review of the entire non-compete package (including choice of law clause) is needed before a final opinion can issue. - The employee's specific role and access to confidential information is not described — this affects the legitimate-interest analysis. ### 7. Recommendation Concrete next steps. Numbered list: 1. Redraft the non-compete clause with proportionate geography (UAE only, or specific Emirates) and duration (12 months). 2. Add a recital stating the specific legitimate business interest being protected. 3. Obtain a qualified UAE employment counsel sign-off before the contract is executed. ## Voice and register - **Active voice, declarative sentences**: "The clause fails the proportionality test" not "It may be the case that the proportionality test has not been met." - **BLUF principle**: the conclusion comes first at every level — document, section, paragraph. - **Calibrated language**: use the uncertainty vocabulary consistently. "Will" = near-certain. "Likely" = 60–80%. "May" = genuine uncertainty. "Risk" = known exposure. Avoid "arguably" as a weasel word when a cleaner statement is available. - **No filler hedges**: "It should be noted that" and "It is worth observing that" are noise — cut them. - **Specific citations**: every legal proposition must carry a citation. A citation-free assertion is an opinion, not analysis. ## Length | Type | Target length | |---|---| | Triage memo (quick risk flag) | 1–2 pages | | Advice note (single issue) | 2–3 pages | | Full opinion (multiple issues) | 3–5 pages | | Transaction opinion (M&A, major deal) | 5+ pages as warranted | Length beyond these guidelines requires justification by the complexity of the matter. ## Common mistakes - **Bottom line buried at the end**: partners read the first paragraph and skim the rest. - **Over-hedged bottom line**: "this is a complex area that depends on many factors" is not a bottom line. - **Citations missing or approximate**: a memo that says "under the labor law" without article numbers fails the accuracy standard. - **No open issues section**: failing to flag what was not reviewed creates reliance risk. - **Generic recommendations**: "seek qualified legal advice" as the only recommendation is a failure of analysis. ## Related skills - [[output-irac-structure]] - [[output-inline-citations-with-pinpoints]] - [[output-source-attribution-block]] - [[output-markdown-legal-doc]] - [[conversation-uncertainty-language]]