AgentCounsel

Motion Opposition Drafter

Canonical path: skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/SKILL.md

Agent Trigger Description

Use when organizing and drafting a DRAFT opposition or response brief to a pending motion — deconstructing the movant's arguments into a point-by-point response outline, mapping the movant's cited authorities to verification placeholders, and assembling a source-cited opposition draft for attorney review before filing.

What this produces: Point-by-point response outline mapped to the movant's arguments; Draft opposition brief cited to the record and flagged for attorney verification; Authority-verification and research-referral list for every movant citation

What you give it: The movant's motion, memorandum, and any supporting declarations or exhibits; The case theory and the client's position in opposition; The relevant record materials that support the opposition; The response deadline as stated on the docket or scheduling order

When to use it: An opposing party has filed a dispositive or non-dispositive motion and counsel needs a first-draft opposition, response outline, or structured oral-argument outline.

At a glance

Practice areaLitigation
Categorydrafting
Risk levelhigh
Recommended quality checksattorney-review-gate legal-prose-polish output-format-compliance-check citation-integrity-check source-validation-check assumption-audit hallucination-red-team jurisdiction-deadline-gates privilege-confidentiality-check
Eval coverageManual eval ready
Compatible platformschatgpt, claude, cursor, codex, gemini, generic-md
Related skillsbrief section drafter, legal research memo, negative treatment check, litigation chronology

Example output not yet available.

Selective execution package

This skill has a typed execution contract at skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/SPEC.json. Its compact core is suitable for routing and quick triage. Standard or deep execution also needs the resources selected by the contract.

Selection rule: choose a declared mode and evaluate each module's machine-readable activation object exactly. Missing activation inputs fail closed. Do not load every conditional module merely because an input is absent.

Declared modes: See the compiled contract

Budget scenarios: 3

Portable copy: “Copy Full Package” includes every possible resource, so it is complete but not context-minimal. Use MCP get_skill_context for the exact selected bundle.

ModuleKindActivationCanonical path
motion-deconstruction workflow-module Modes: standard, deep-review; always within an allowed mode. skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/motion-deconstruction.md
opposition-drafting workflow-module Modes: standard, deep-review; always within an allowed mode. skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/opposition-drafting.md
expanded-verification quality-check Modes: deep-review; always within an allowed mode. skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/expanded-verification.md
Typed contract: SPEC.json 
{
  "schema_version": "2.0",
  "skill_id": "litigation/motion-opposition-drafter",
  "modules": [
    {
      "id": "motion-deconstruction",
      "kind": "workflow-module",
      "path": "skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/motion-deconstruction.md",
      "required": false,
      "load_when": "standard or deep-review mode",
      "activation": {
        "modes": [
          "standard",
          "deep-review"
        ],
        "operator": "always"
      }
    },
    {
      "id": "opposition-drafting",
      "kind": "workflow-module",
      "path": "skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/opposition-drafting.md",
      "required": false,
      "load_when": "standard or deep-review mode",
      "activation": {
        "modes": [
          "standard",
          "deep-review"
        ],
        "operator": "always"
      }
    },
    {
      "id": "expanded-verification",
      "kind": "quality-check",
      "path": "skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/expanded-verification.md",
      "required": false,
      "load_when": "deep-review mode",
      "activation": {
        "modes": [
          "deep-review"
        ],
        "operator": "always"
      }
    }
  ],
  "context_scenarios": [
    {
      "id": "quick-triage",
      "mode": "quick-triage",
      "inputs": {
        "movants-motion-memorandum-and-any-supporting-declarations-or-exhibits": "Provided complete motion papers",
        "case-theory-and-the-clients-position-in-opposition": "The motion should be denied on the supplied record",
        "relevant-record-materials-that-support-the-opposition": "Provided record materials",
        "response-deadline-as-stated-on-the-docket-or-scheduling-order": "User-supplied date [deadline verification required]"
      },
      "baseline_estimated_tokens": 6346,
      "max_ratio": 0.4
    },
    {
      "id": "standard",
      "mode": "standard",
      "inputs": {
        "movants-motion-memorandum-and-any-supporting-declarations-or-exhibits": "Provided complete motion papers",
        "case-theory-and-the-clients-position-in-opposition": "The motion should be denied on the supplied record",
        "relevant-record-materials-that-support-the-opposition": "Provided record materials",
        "response-deadline-as-stated-on-the-docket-or-scheduling-order": "User-supplied date [deadline verification required]"
      },
      "baseline_estimated_tokens": 6346,
      "max_ratio": 0.75
    },
    {
      "id": "deep-review",
      "mode": "deep-review",
      "inputs": {
        "movants-motion-memorandum-and-any-supporting-declarations-or-exhibits": "Provided complete motion papers",
        "case-theory-and-the-clients-position-in-opposition": "The motion should be denied on the supplied record",
        "relevant-record-materials-that-support-the-opposition": "Provided record materials",
        "response-deadline-as-stated-on-the-docket-or-scheduling-order": "User-supplied date [deadline verification required]"
      },
      "baseline_estimated_tokens": 6346,
      "max_ratio": 1.1
    }
  ]
}
Module: motion-deconstruction

Canonical path: skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/motion-deconstruction.md

Motion Deconstruction and Response Map

Draft legal work product for attorney review. This module inherits every safety rule and gate in the parent skill.

Use this module in standard and deep-review modes.

Deconstruct the movant's papers

Create one entry for each numbered heading or distinct proposition advanced by the movant. For every entry:

  1. Restate the argument accurately in the movant's own terms and cite the exact page or paragraph in the supplied papers.
  2. Record each cited case, statute, rule, regulation, or other authority exactly as presented.
  3. Add [VERIFY: confirm citation, confirm it says what the movant claims, confirm current treatment] to every authority. Never infer that the authority exists, is correctly characterized, or remains current.
  4. List each supporting factual assertion with a pinpoint to the movant's papers.
  5. Flag ambiguity rather than resolving it into a weaker argument.

Where subsequent treatment may matter, identify the authority as a candidate for skills/legal-research/negative-treatment-check/SKILL.md.

Build the point-by-point response map

For each movant argument, record:

  • the client's counter-position;
  • each supporting record item and pinpoint, or [VERIFY: record cite needed];
  • the type of response authority required, followed by [citation needed];
  • whether the gap is directed authority still to be supplied or a genuine research referral to skills/legal-research/legal-research-memo/SKILL.md;
  • any threshold, procedural, standard-of-review, or timeliness point, without asserting an unprovided rule and without calculating a deadline;
  • the most likely rejoinder and any record or authority needed to answer it.

Confirm posture and presentation constraints

Record the motion type, requested relief, supplied standard of review, supplied burden, hearing or response date, and forum requirements. Mark anything not directly supplied [CONFIRM: attorney to verify]; mark every timing item [deadline verification required].

Surface weakness before prose drafting

For each weak, unsupported, internally inconsistent, or strategically risky response point:

  • explain the weakness in the Drafting Notes;
  • identify the missing evidence or authority;
  • give at least two attorney options, ordinarily pursue with an explicit caveat, reframe, omit, or research;
  • never dress a weak response up as settled or well supported.

Drafting Notes structure

Populate Sections 1 through 4 of templates/opposition-response-outline.md with:

  • motion summary and procedural posture;
  • argument deconstruction;
  • movant-authority verification inventory;
  • point-by-point response map;
  • record gaps;
  • response-authority gaps and research referrals;
  • standard-of-review and forum-rule confirmations;
  • weak points, attorney options, and open questions.
Module: opposition-drafting

Canonical path: skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/opposition-drafting.md

Opposition Drafting

Draft legal work product for attorney review. This module inherits every safety rule and gate in the parent skill.

Use this module after motion-deconstruction.md in standard and deep-review modes.

Drafting disciplines

Draft the opposition from the approved response map while applying all four disciplines at the same time:

  1. Accurate characterization. Fairly restate the movant's argument before answering it. Preserve material qualifications and the actual requested relief.
  2. Record fidelity. Cite every factual statement to a supplied record item with the available page, line, paragraph, exhibit, or Bates identifier. Use [VERIFY: record cite needed] where support is absent. Quote exactly; flag any paraphrase.
  3. Citation discipline. Add no new authority. Mark every response-side proposition [citation needed] or [pin cite needed]. Keep the complete verification label on every movant authority discussed.
  4. Candor about weakness. Flag an unsupported or risky response point inline with [NOTE TO ATTORNEY: see Drafting Notes item ___].

Opposition draft structure

Begin with:

DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW - DO NOT FILE UNREVIEWED Every response citation, movant authority, quotation, paraphrase, factual statement, record pinpoint, procedural rule, and date requires attorney verification before filing or transmission.

Then produce:

  • a preliminary statement accurately summarizing the client's opposition position;
  • the standard of review as supplied by counsel or [standard of review: verify jurisdiction];
  • response headings that track the movant's sequence unless the attorney has approved another organization;
  • a fair statement of each movant point followed by the corresponding response;
  • supplied record citations or visible record gaps;
  • directed authority or visible citation and research gaps;
  • inline weak-point notes;
  • [deadline verification required] on the response deadline and every other timing item;
  • [CONFIRM: page/word limit not verified] and equivalent placeholders for unsupplied forum requirements.

Do not convert the draft into a file-ready pleading. Signature blocks, final caption details, service language, filing metadata, and jurisdiction-specific certification language remain attorney-controlled unless supplied and confirmed.

Module: expanded-verification

Canonical path: skills/litigation/motion-opposition-drafter/modules/expanded-verification.md

Expanded Filing Verification

Draft legal work product for attorney review. This module inherits every safety rule and gate in the parent skill.

Use this module only in deep-review mode. Add these checks to the parent checklist and pre-populate every unresolved item.

  • [ ] Each supporting declaration, affidavit, exhibit, transcript, pleading, and cited docket item was reviewed in full.
  • [ ] Every argument in the motion deconstruction matches the actual movant papers, including qualifications, exceptions, and requested relief.
  • [ ] Every movant authority was retrieved and checked for citation accuracy, quoted language, holding, context, and current treatment, directly or through negative-treatment-check.
  • [ ] Every response-side legal proposition is supported by verified primary authority selected by the attorney.
  • [ ] Every pinpoint citation resolves to the asserted proposition or record fact.
  • [ ] Every quotation was checked character by character against the supplied source.
  • [ ] Every paraphrase was checked against the source and revised if it changes meaning.
  • [ ] Every factual assertion is tied to provided record material; unsupported assertions were removed or expressly identified.
  • [ ] Any evidentiary foundation, authentication, admissibility, objection, or judicial-notice issue implicated by the response has been assessed by counsel.
  • [ ] Standard of review, burdens, threshold requirements, procedural posture, and available relief are correct for the forum and motion type. [verify jurisdiction]
  • [ ] Local rules, standing orders, judge-specific procedures, citation form, filing format, page or word limits, and service requirements have been independently confirmed.
  • [ ] The response deadline, hearing date, and every related timing item were independently verified from authoritative sources; no date was calculated by this workflow. [deadline verification required]
  • [ ] All genuine research referrals were completed outside this drafting workflow and incorporated by the attorney.
  • [ ] Adverse authority and the strongest version of the movant's position were considered rather than omitted or weakened.
  • [ ] Every weak response point was affirmatively accepted, reframed, researched, or removed by the responsible attorney.
  • [ ] Duty of candor, factual contentions, legal-contention support, sanctions exposure, and any certification obligations were assessed by counsel.
  • [ ] Confidential, privileged, sealed, redacted, and protective-order material is handled consistently with governing restrictions.
  • [ ] The final draft is internally consistent with the case theory, record, requested relief, and other filed positions.
  • [ ] All open questions and placeholders are resolved before filing.
  • [ ] The responsible attorney has performed the final substantive and filing review and accepts professional responsibility for the opposition.

Purpose

Produce a disciplined first draft of an opposition or response brief for attorney review. The workflow deconstructs the movant's actual papers, maps each argument to a point-by-point response, cites only provided record materials, and treats every movant authority as unverified. It never invents counter-authority. A missing authority becomes a visible research referral rather than a fabricated citation.

This skill does not decide litigation strategy, predict an outcome, or produce a final filing. The draft is legal work product for a licensed attorney to revise and approve. Do not file unreviewed.

Use When

Required Inputs

Do not fabricate an input or draft against a motion the skill has not been shown.

Do Not Use When

Workflow

  1. Confirm the complete motion papers, case theory, matter identity, posture, record materials, supplied deadline, and forum materials. Stop and ask for any required missing input.
  2. Route affirmative drafting, new research, negative-treatment checking, and chronology work to the appropriate sibling skill before substantive drafting.
  3. Select the execution mode:
    • quick-triage: use this core only to identify scope, missing inputs, motion posture, deadline-verification needs, and the modules required for a later draft;
    • standard: load modules/motion-deconstruction.md and modules/opposition-drafting.md;
    • deep-review: load both standard modules plus modules/expanded-verification.md.
  4. Follow the selected modules in order. Universal sequence: deconstruct the motion, verify and map authorities, map record support, flag weak points, draft point by point, and assemble the attorney-review package.
  5. Keep all unsupported propositions and missing record support visible. Never silently fill a gap.

Output Format

Return only the detail supported by the selected mode.

  1. Drafting Notes (internal work product): motion and posture summary, argument map, movant-authority verification list, response outline, record and authority gaps, weak points, forum-rule questions, and research referrals.
  2. Opposition Draft: begin with DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW - DO NOT FILE UNREVIEWED; fairly state each movant argument before answering it; use only supplied record material and directed authority; preserve every verification placeholder.
  3. Attorney Verification Checklist: include the applicable core and module checks, pre-populated with every unresolved item.

Use templates/opposition-response-outline.md when the standard or deep-review mode is selected.

Attorney Verification Checklist

Core raw SKILL.md

---
name: Motion Opposition Drafter
description: "Use when organizing and drafting a DRAFT opposition or response brief to a pending motion — deconstructing the movant's arguments into a point-by-point response outline, mapping the movant's cited authorities to verification placeholders, and assembling a source-cited opposition draft for attorney review before filing."
practice_area: litigation
task_type: drafting
jurisdictions: []
risk_level: high
requires_attorney_review: true
inputs:
  - "The movant's motion, memorandum, and any supporting declarations or exhibits"
  - "The case theory and the client's position in opposition"
  - "The relevant record materials that support the opposition"
  - "The response deadline as stated on the docket or scheduling order"
outputs:
  - "Point-by-point response outline mapped to the movant's arguments"
  - "Draft opposition brief cited to the record and flagged for attorney verification"
  - "Authority-verification and research-referral list for every movant citation"
related_skills:
  - skills/litigation/brief-section-drafter/SKILL.md
  - skills/legal-research/legal-research-memo/SKILL.md
  - skills/legal-research/negative-treatment-check/SKILL.md
  - skills/litigation/litigation-chronology/SKILL.md
tags:
  - litigation
  - opposition-brief
  - motion-practice
  - drafting
  - record-citation
  - response-brief
---

# Motion Opposition Drafter

## Purpose

Produce a disciplined first draft of an opposition or response brief for attorney review. The workflow deconstructs the movant's actual papers, maps each argument to a point-by-point response, cites only provided record materials, and treats every movant authority as unverified. It never invents counter-authority. A missing authority becomes a visible research referral rather than a fabricated citation.

This skill does not decide litigation strategy, predict an outcome, or produce a final filing. The draft is legal work product for a licensed attorney to revise and approve. Do not file unreviewed.

## Use When

- An opposing party has filed a dispositive or non-dispositive motion and counsel needs a first-draft opposition, response outline, or structured oral-argument outline.
- The complete motion papers and enough record material to answer them are available.
- The user needs drafting around authority already supplied or directed by counsel, not independent legal research.
- The matter is active litigation and the output will remain within attorney review.

## Required Inputs

- **Matter identification.** Matter name, number, and enough context to identify the proceeding.
- **Complete movant papers.** The motion, supporting memorandum, declarations, affidavits, and exhibits. A summary is not a substitute. Stop if the papers are missing.
- **Case theory and opposition position.** A concise statement of why the requested relief should be denied or limited. Stop if this is missing.
- **Record materials.** Documents, testimony, pleadings, declarations, or other provided items supporting each response point. Every factual statement must cite a provided record item or carry `[VERIFY: record cite needed]`.
- **Response deadline.** Record only the date exactly as supplied from the docket, scheduling order, or attorney. The skill never calculates a response date and always marks it `[deadline verification required]`.
- **Forum requirements.** Pasted local rules, standing orders, page or word limits, and citation requirements. Anything not supplied remains `[CONFIRM: forum rule not provided]`.
- **Directed authorities.** Authorities counsel has already identified and authorized for use. Missing response authority remains `[citation needed]` and may require `skills/legal-research/legal-research-memo/SKILL.md`.
- **Standard of review.** Use counsel's supplied formulation or `[CONFIRM: standard of review - verify jurisdiction]`.
- Optional: a populated `practice-profiles/litigation.md`, treated as guidance rather than authority.

Do not fabricate an input or draft against a motion the skill has not been shown.

## Do Not Use When

- Drafting the client's affirmative motion or reply. Use `skills/litigation/brief-section-drafter/SKILL.md`.
- Locating new authority. Use `skills/legal-research/legal-research-memo/SKILL.md`, then return with attorney-directed sources.
- Determining whether a cited case remains good law. Use `skills/legal-research/negative-treatment-check/SKILL.md`.
- Building a litigation-grade chronology before drafting. Use `skills/litigation/litigation-chronology/SKILL.md`.
- No complete motion papers are available.
- The user seeks a prediction, merits conclusion, or filing-ready document.

## Legal Safety Rules

- **Source discipline.** Follow `core/source-and-citation-discipline.md`. Never invent authority, quotations, procedural rules, facts, or dates. Distinguish supplied facts, supplied sources, assumptions, analysis, and verification items.
- **Never invent counter-authority.** Mark response propositions `[citation needed]`; route genuine research gaps to the legal-research workflow.
- **Verify every movant authority and current treatment.** Record the citation as presented and mark it `[VERIFY: confirm citation, characterization, holding, and current treatment]`. Never accept the movant's description as correct.
- **Attorney review is mandatory.** The output is draft legal work product, not legal advice. It may not be filed, transmitted, or relied upon until a licensed attorney reviews and approves it.
- **The standard and burden are unverified unless supplied by counsel.** Do not fill either from model memory.
- **Record fidelity is mandatory.** Every factual statement must trace to provided record material. Never characterize an unseen document. Quote supplied text exactly; flag paraphrases `[VERIFY: paraphrase and pinpoint]`.
- **Characterize the motion fairly.** Do not weaken, simplify, or guess at the movant's theory. Flag ambiguity.
- **Flag weak counter-arguments honestly.** Identify unsupported, risky, or strategically weak points and give counsel options to omit, reframe, or research them.
- **Never calculates or implies a deadline.** Record only user-supplied dates and mark every timing item `[deadline verification required]`.
- **Forum rules remain unverified unless provided.** Do not assert format or length requirements from background knowledge.
- **Protect confidentiality and privilege.** Keep sensitive facts and work product inside the matter team.
- **Use the filing banner.** Every opposition draft must state `DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW - DO NOT FILE UNREVIEWED`.
- A loaded practice profile may guide style and positions, but never overrides attorney judgment.

## Workflow

1. Confirm the complete motion papers, case theory, matter identity, posture, record materials, supplied deadline, and forum materials. Stop and ask for any required missing input.
2. Route affirmative drafting, new research, negative-treatment checking, and chronology work to the appropriate sibling skill before substantive drafting.
3. Select the execution mode:
   - **quick-triage:** use this core only to identify scope, missing inputs, motion posture, deadline-verification needs, and the modules required for a later draft;
   - **standard:** load `modules/motion-deconstruction.md` and `modules/opposition-drafting.md`;
   - **deep-review:** load both standard modules plus `modules/expanded-verification.md`.
4. Follow the selected modules in order. Universal sequence: deconstruct the motion, verify and map authorities, map record support, flag weak points, draft point by point, and assemble the attorney-review package.
5. Keep all unsupported propositions and missing record support visible. Never silently fill a gap.

## Output Format

Return only the detail supported by the selected mode.

1. **Drafting Notes (internal work product):** motion and posture summary, argument map, movant-authority verification list, response outline, record and authority gaps, weak points, forum-rule questions, and research referrals.
2. **Opposition Draft:** begin with `DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW - DO NOT FILE UNREVIEWED`; fairly state each movant argument before answering it; use only supplied record material and directed authority; preserve every verification placeholder.
3. **Attorney Verification Checklist:** include the applicable core and module checks, pre-populated with every unresolved item.

Use `templates/opposition-response-outline.md` when the standard or deep-review mode is selected.

## Attorney Verification Checklist

- [ ] Complete motion papers and supporting materials were reviewed, not summarized or assumed.
- [ ] The case theory, procedural posture, and requested relief are accurately stated.
- [ ] Every movant argument is characterized fairly and every movant authority has been independently checked, including current treatment.
- [ ] Every response authority and pinpoint is supplied from a verified source.
- [ ] Every quotation, paraphrase, and factual statement is confirmed against provided record material.
- [ ] Standard of review, burden, forum rules, and response deadline are independently confirmed. `[verify jurisdiction]` `[deadline verification required]`
- [ ] Every weak point and research referral has been resolved by the responsible attorney.
- [ ] Confidentiality, privilege, and duty-of-candor concerns have been reviewed.
- [ ] The responsible attorney has revised and approved the final filing and accepts professional responsibility for it.
- [ ] Any loaded practice-profile position was treated as guidance, with deviations and profile-silent issues surfaced.