---

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]]