Every opinion, assumption, qualification gap, and challenge point, extracted consistently across every expert report, every time.
The challenge
Expert reports are lengthy, technical, and dense. Legal teams must rapidly understand what the expert was asked to do, what opinions are being offered, what assumptions underpin them, and where the methodology is vulnerable to challenge. Without a structured first pass, gaps in scope, qualification, and reasoning go undetected until they surface at the worst possible moment in the matter.
The solution
Apply targeted Question Lists to the expert report, CV, appendices, exhibits, and key underlying materials. Question Lists can be run individually or in combination depending on the review objective, returning structured, citation-backed outputs tied directly to source materials. Teams can identify core opinions, test assumptions, surface weaknesses, and build challenge strategy earlier in the case.
Download this Question List
Download a ready to import version of this Question List
Import a Question List
Learn how to import a Question List ready for use
Run a Question List
After import, learn how to run a Question List against your document(s)
Question List In Action
Identify then select the compliant, answer, or other pleading, and Start a review.
Apply the Pleadings Review Question List across the selected documents.
Question Lists allow you to run a consistent list of prompts against all selected documents in just a couple of clicks.
Run a prompt to map the case and build a factual timeline which identifies all parties, their roles, and claims against each.
Being specific with what you would like included in your mapping enables Ask iManage to return exactly what you need.
Copy this prompt
Create a chronological timeline of all dated events and actions described in the pleading. Include all parties involved at each stage.
Copy this prompt
What are the key turning points or triggering events that led to the plaintiff's claims?
Run follow-up prompts to flag contradictory allegations, missing information, and weaknesses in the legal claims.
Copy this prompt
Are there any factual allegations that appear contradictory or internally inconsistent? Quote the conflicting statements.
Copy this prompt
Which allegations are pleaded with specificity (including dates, amounts, documents) versus general or conclusory?
Copy this prompt
Are all legal elements of each claim adequately pleaded, or are there potential motion-to-dismiss vulnerabilities?
Copy this prompt
What critical facts are missing or unexplained? What information would strengthen or weaken the plaintiff's case?
Validate by reviewing source text using evidence markers.
Ask iManage responses are always grounded in your documents, with evidence markers taking you to the exact citation.
Run a follow-up prompt to identify conflicting allegations and build a coherent factual record across multiple pleadings.
Copy this prompt
Where do the allegations conflict between the complaint and answer?
Copy this prompt
What facts are disputed versus admitted?
Copy this prompt
Are all claims properly pled?
Use Ask iManage to build your arguments.
Copy this prompt
Which claims have the weakest factual or legal foundation?
Export and act.
Ask iManage Export allows for direct use in motion practice, discovery planning, or trial preparation.
Working with Question Lists
More to explore
Creating a Consolidated Litigation Deal Memory
Use Case
Identifying Inconsistencies Across Witness Statements and Depositions
Use Case
Accelerating Trial, Hearing, and Conference Preparation
Use Case