Sample output: Reservation of Rights Review
This is an illustrative sample of what the Reservation of Rights Review skill produces. Every party, date, document, and fact is fictional — invented for illustration only.
The fictional scenario
Sample Request — reservation-of-rights-review
Fictional illustration. All parties, facts, figures, forms, and documents below are invented for this example. The example contains no real or invented legal authority.
Please run reservation-of-rights-review on a reservation of rights letter and our policy, and flag the issues for coverage counsel.
Matter facts
- Insured: Maple Ridge Cabinetry LLC (fictional).
- The user's role: in-house counsel for the insured.
- Policy type: commercial general liability (CGL).
- Claim: a third-party property damage suit tendered to the insurer.
- Jurisdiction: governing law
not provided.
Materials provided (fictional)
- A reservation of rights letter from the insurer, with numbered paragraphs.
- The CGL policy — declarations and Coverage Form CG-EX-1, with numbered sections.
The reservation of rights letter (fictional excerpts)
- ¶2 — identifies the policy and the claim.
- ¶4 — recites the facts the insurer relies on.
- ¶6 — cites "Exclusion §I.A.2" and "Condition §IV" of the policy.
- ¶7 — cites "Exclusion §I.C," which the insured cannot locate in the policy.
- ¶9 — states the insurer will provide a defense subject to a full reservation.
- ¶11 — requests additional information from the insured.
Stated facts
- The insured cannot locate a "§I.C" in Coverage Form CG-EX-1.
- The letter does not say whether a conflict of interest or independent counsel issue is raised.
Please: summarize the letter; build an issue list and a provision-reference table cross-referencing each cited provision to the policy; flag ambiguities and inconsistencies; list missing facts; and do not conclude whether the reservation is legally sufficient or effective.
What the skill produced
Sample Output — reservation-of-rights-review
Draft work product for attorney review. Not legal advice. Every party, fact, figure, form, document, and reference below is fictional and illustrative. This example contains no real or invented legal authority. It shows the shape of the skill's deliverable — not a model answer for any matter.
Capability and Reliance Notice
This is a draft review of a reservation of rights letter for a qualified, licensed attorney. It does not provide legal advice, conclude whether the reservation is legally sufficient, effective, or timely, determine whether any right was preserved or waived, conclude on coverage or a duty to defend, decide whether independent counsel is required, or calculate any deadline. A qualified attorney must review it before any response to the letter.
Gates Table
| Gate | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Policy type | Commercial general liability (CGL) | User request |
| User's role | In-house counsel; insured-side | User request |
| Claim | Third-party property damage suit | User request |
| Jurisdiction / governing law | not provided [verify jurisdiction] | — |
| Documents | ROR letter (numbered paragraphs); CGL policy | Provided set |
Letter Summary
The reservation of rights letter identifies the policy and the claim (¶2), recites the facts the insurer relies on (¶4), and cites policy provisions as the basis for its reservation (¶6-¶7). The insurer states it will provide a defense subject to a full reservation of rights (¶9) and requests additional information from the insured (¶11). One cited provision ("§I.C", ¶7) could not be located in the policy as provided. The letter does not address a conflict of interest or independent counsel.
Issue List
| # | Issue | Letter reference | Description | Why it matters | Attorney follow-up |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cited provision not located | ¶7 | The letter cites "Exclusion §I.C", which is not found in Form CG-EX-1 as provided | A reservation rests on the provisions it cites | [ATTORNEY TO CONFIRM] whether §I.C exists in another form or is a misreference |
| 2 | Scope of the reservation | ¶9 | Defense offered subject to a "full reservation" | The breadth of what is reserved should be examined from the insured's side | Review ¶9 against ¶6-¶7 for consistency |
| 3 | Conflict / independent counsel | Letter (full review) | The letter does not address a conflict of interest or independent counsel | Whether a conflict exists is a question for the insured's counsel | [ATTORNEY TO CONFIRM] whether a conflict-of-interest issue is present |
| 4 | Facts relied on | ¶4 | The facts recited should be checked against the claim record | A reservation recites facts; the record should support them | Compare ¶4 facts to the claim file |
| 5 | Information request | ¶11 | The insurer requests additional information | The request and any cooperation condition should be reviewed before responding | Review ¶11 against CG-EX-1 §IV cooperation condition |
Provision-Reference Table
| Letter reference | Provision cited | Policy location | Match status |
|---|---|---|---|
| ¶6 | Exclusion §I.A.2 | CG-EX-1 §I.A.2 | Matches |
| ¶6 | Condition §IV | CG-EX-1 §IV | Matches |
| ¶7 | Exclusion §I.C | Not located in CG-EX-1 as provided | not found |
Ambiguity and Consistency List
- ¶7 cites "§I.C" — the provision is
not foundin the provided policy; the citation isambiguousand may be a misreference or point to a form not provided. - The letter's defense position (¶9) and the cited grounds (¶6-¶7) should be read together for internal consistency; one cited ground (¶7) cannot currently be verified.
Missing Facts
- Whether "§I.C" exists in a policy form not provided —
not provided. - Whether a conflict of interest or independent counsel issue is present — the letter is silent;
unknown. - Governing law / jurisdiction —
not provided[verify jurisdiction].
Attorney Verification Checklist
- [ ] Confirm whether "Exclusion §I.C" (¶7) exists in another policy form, or is a misreference.
- [ ] Confirm governing law and jurisdiction
[verify jurisdiction]. - [ ] Review the scope of the reservation (¶9) against the cited grounds.
- [ ] Determine whether a conflict-of-interest or independent-counsel issue is present — this review does not.
- [ ] Confirm the ¶4 facts against the claim record before any response.
Assumptions
- Assumed the provided policy forms are complete; "§I.C" is marked
not foundon that basis —[CONFIRM]. - No conclusion on the legal sufficiency, effectiveness, or timeliness of the reservation is drawn; all such questions are for the attorney.