LLM LAW LIBRARY — FOR CHAT-WINDOW LLMS ======================================= You do not need tools, MCP, code execution, a workspace, or a skill loader. If you can open ordinary web links, you can use this library. Read this page, construct the GET URLs below, open them, and reason from the returned primary legal material. The API is free and requires no authentication. This is a research library, not a lawyer and not an answer engine. It retrieves real court opinions, statutes, statutory-definition pointers, and court rules. You remain responsible for reading the authority, matching it to the proposition, checking dates and jurisdiction, and stating uncertainty honestly. BASE URL -------- https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw Spaces and punctuation in parameter values must be URL-encoded. Most chat browsers do this automatically when opening a link. Add &format=text to any GET request for indented plain text; omit it for JSON. STARTING EXAMPLES ----------------- Search cases: https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw/search?query=qualified%20immunity%20excessive%20force&mode=hybrid&top_k=10 Load a full opinion using an opinion_id returned by search: https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw/case?opinion_id=9423233 Verify that a reporter citation resolves to a real opinion: https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw/caselaw/verify?citation=384%20U.S.%20436 Search California statutes: https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw/statute/search?query=negligence&jurisdiction=state%3ACA&top_k=10 Load a statute by citation: https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw/statute/section?citation=42%20U.S.C.%20%C2%A7%201983 Find where a term is statutorily defined: https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw/term/search?term=fiduciary&include_red_flags=true&top_k=20 Search the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw/court_rule/search?query=initial%20disclosures&rule_set=us-frcp&top_k=10 Load FRCP 26: https://implausible.enterprises/api/caselaw/court_rule/section?rule_set=us-frcp&rule_number=26 THE RESEARCH LOOP ----------------- 1. Frame the issue: jurisdiction, court level, date, posture, claim or motion, and the precise proposition that needs authority. 2. Search broadly with hybrid mode. Search exact citations, party names, and distinctive phrases with bm25 mode. 3. Keep a citation ledger. A citation may appear in your answer only if you actually retrieved it during this research session. 4. Open the full opinion, statute section, or rule before saying what it holds. A search snippet is a lead, not proof of a proposition. 5. For each authority, state its relationship to the proposition: directly_on_point, applies_general_rule, analogous, or background. 6. Put the answer first. Name no more than three controlling authorities, then add only material supporting or adverse authority. 7. If you believe something but cannot support it from retrieved authority, label it an unsupported proposition and say what still needs checking. 8. Check adverse authority and alternative interpretations before concluding. 9. Report corpus gaps, stale dates, ambiguous scope, and jurisdiction mismatch. Never fill a retrieval gap from memory while presenting it as verified. RESEARCH RECIPES ---------------- GENERAL LEGAL RESEARCH - Search the governing statute or rule first when the issue is text-driven. - Search cases for the governing test and application to materially similar facts. - Open the full text of the best results. - Search the name/citation of each candidate in bm25 mode to find exact references. - Conclude with answer, controlling authority, material counterauthority, and gaps. CITATION AUDIT - For each citation, use the citation-verification URL. - Resolve the opinion_id and open the full opinion. - Compare the user's proposition with the actual holding and procedural posture. - Classify: supports, supports only a narrower proposition, analogous only, contradicts, or could not verify. - Do not treat automated treatment counts as a good-law verdict. Search later cases and inspect the opinions that allegedly criticize, limit, or overrule it. ADVERSE-AUTHORITY / RED-TEAM PASS - Restate the position in its strongest fair form. - Search for cases rejecting its rule, limiting its elements, distinguishing its facts, applying contrary standards, or exposing procedural bars. - Search binding authority before persuasive authority. - Build 3-5 attack lines. Anchor each to retrieved full text. - Identify the strongest attack, the best response, and what evidence would change the assessment. Do not manufacture symmetry where one side is stronger. SUPPORTING-AUTHORITY / BLUE-TEAM PASS - Identify each element the position must establish. - Find the governing text and binding cases for each disputed element. - Prefer narrow, directly applicable propositions over broad favorable language. - Anticipate the strongest adverse authority and explain a defensible distinction. - Separate legal support from factual assumptions that require record evidence. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS - Identify claim, jurisdiction, governing substantive law, accrual rule, filing event, possible tolling, repose, notice prerequisites, and retroactivity. - Retrieve the limitations statute and every cross-reference it depends on. - Search cases for accrual and tolling; do not infer them from the period alone. - State the period and trigger separately. Give a calendar date only when the triggering facts are known. Flag repose and shorter special statutes. PROCEDURAL DEADLINES - Search and open the applicable statewide/federal rule and relevant local rule. - Identify the triggering event, count, calendar/court-day convention, service adjustment, holiday/weekend rule, and extension authority. - Do not calculate a dispositive deadline from a search snippet or remembered rule. - This public GET layer currently retrieves rules but does not expose Law Tools' deterministic date calculator. Show the formula and required facts; label any hand-computed date for independent docketing verification. STATUTE OR JURISDICTION COMPARISON - Hold the question constant across jurisdictions. - Search each jurisdiction separately; absence of a hit is not absence of law. - Retrieve full statutory/rule text and material cases for every compared forum. - Compare rule, exceptions, definitions, effective date, and practical consequence. - Distinguish genuine legal variation from corpus or citation-format gaps. DISCOVERY DRAFTING - Retrieve the governing discovery rules, numerical limits, proportionality rule, privilege rules, ESI/preservation authority, and local rules before drafting. - Tie each request to an element, defense, damages theory, custodian, or data source. - Draft requests separately from the legal memo explaining them. - Never claim a numerical limit or response deadline without the full rule text. BENCH MEMO / MOOT COURT - Retrieve the governing test and 1-3 controlling authorities. - Present the strongest argument for each side and the decisive factual disputes. - Test jurisdiction, standard of review, burden, preservation, and remedy. - Give a tentative disposition, not a simulated certainty; identify what could flip it and which propositions remain unsupported. ENDPOINT REFERENCE ------------------ GET /search query (required), mode=hybrid|bm25|vector, top_k=1..25, court_id, source=opinion|parenthetical GET /case opinion_id (required) GET /context source_type, source_id, passage_text, context_chars GET /caselaw/verify citation (required). This confirms resolution and returns automated treatment signals; it does not establish that the case supports a proposition or remains good law. GET /statute/search query (required), jurisdiction=federal|state:XX, top_k=1..25, status GET /statute/section citation OR statute_version_id GET /term/search term (required), jurisdiction, include_red_flags=true|false, top_k=1..50 GET /term/jurisdiction jurisdiction (required), top_k=1..200 GET /court_rule/search query (required), rule_set, jurisdiction, subdivision, district, category, top_k=1..25 GET /court_rule/section citation OR court_rule_version_id OR rule_set + rule_number GET /court_rule/browse rule_set (required), parent, top_k=1..500 GET /stats and GET /health JURISDICTIONS ------------- Federal statutes: federal States and DC: state:XX, such as state:CA, state:NY, state:TX, state:DC SEARCH MODES ------------ hybrid: best general starting point; combines lexical and semantic retrieval. bm25: deterministic lexical retrieval; best for exact citations, names, and phrases. vector: conceptual similarity; useful for exploration, not exact authority lookup. IMPORTANT LIMITS ---------------- - This is not legal advice. A human lawyer remains responsible for the work. - Citations resolve to real corpus records, but a real citation can still be irrelevant, mischaracterized, superseded, or attached to a dissent. - Automated treatment/Shepardizer fields are noisy research leads. They are not a substitute for reading later opinions or a commercial citator. - Statute and rule collections vary in freshness and completeness by jurisdiction. Confirm currency and amendment status against an official source before reliance. - Search snippets are truncated and cannot establish holdings by themselves. - GET URLs can be retained in browser history and infrastructure logs. Do not put confidential facts, client names, secrets, or privileged text in a GET query. Use the POST API or another private research channel for sensitive material. - Whole-brief citation verification remains POST-only because briefs are too long and sensitive for query strings. DETAILED, OPTIONAL SKILL FILES ------------------------------ These are ordinary readable documents. A model does not need to install or load them as formal skills; opening and following the relevant file is enough. Index: https://implausible.enterprises/projects/law-library/skills/ Core research and citation audit: https://implausible.enterprises/projects/law-library/skills/law-library-research/SKILL.md Adverse authority, red team, blue team, and bench memo: https://implausible.enterprises/projects/law-library/skills/law-library-adversarial/SKILL.md Limitations periods and procedural deadlines: https://implausible.enterprises/projects/law-library/skills/law-library-procedure/SKILL.md Statute and jurisdiction comparisons: https://implausible.enterprises/projects/law-library/skills/law-library-comparison/SKILL.md Discovery drafting: https://implausible.enterprises/projects/law-library/skills/law-library-discovery/SKILL.md Full documentation: https://implausible.enterprises/projects/law-library/docs.md