Understanding the Report

When a strategy run finishes, the report opens in a two-pane workspace: the full strategy memo as a live document on the left, and the grounds rail — one card per ground and per anticipated opposing argument — on the right. This page teaches you to read both panes so you can walk into a hearing knowing exactly where you're strong, where you're exposed, and what's coming at you.

Case Strategy · the strategy report

The session header

Across the top, the header carries the run's vital signs at a glance:

• Side chip — the side the report argues for (e.g. Complainant / Appellant). Every section downstream is framed from this seat.
• Court and jurisdiction — where the matter sits.
• Stat pills — grounds, authorities, verified, and caution counts. A non-zero caution count means one or more cited authorities need a closer look before you rely on them — see Verified Authorities.
• Actions — Save to Judicio, Moot Court, Export, and Share.

The grounds rail

The rail on the right is your triage surface. Four tabs split the cards:

Tab	What's in it
All	Every ground and every anticipated opposing argument, in order.
Strong	Grounds rated strong — where to lead.
Needs work	Grounds rated moderate or weak — where to shore up before the hearing.
Opposition	The other side's anticipated arguments, each with a prepared rebuttal.

Anatomy of a ground card

Each ground card carries: the title, a strength badge, a one-line gist of the argument, and a meta row with the ground number, the authority count, and — when any cited authority isn't fully verified — a "Check cites" caution dot.

Badge	What it means	What to do
Strong	The ground rests on admitted facts or binding authority squarely on point.	Lead with it.
Moderate	The ground holds but has a condition attached — a fact to prove or a gap to cure.	Read its evidence-gap entries and cure what you can before the hearing.
Weak	Consequential or dependent on other grounds succeeding.	Keep it in the report; don't build the hearing around it.

Opposition cards

Cards on the Opposition tab show the other side's argument with a risk badge (high / medium / low) — how much damage the argument can do if it lands — plus the note that a rebuttal is prepared. The rebuttal itself sits in the memo, directly under the opposing argument it answers.

Drilling into one ground

Click any ground card and the document pane focuses on that ground: its full argument, the authorities it relies on, the opposing argument it must survive, and your rebuttal — all in one view. The Focus button in the toolbar shows when a filter is active; click it (or the card again) to return to the full memo. Use the Grounds button to collapse or reopen the rail, and the search box to find any passage in the report.

The strategy memo, section by section

The document pane renders the full memo in reading order:

1. Title and meta — the matter, your side, the court, the case number, and when the report was generated.
2. Facts summary — the undisputed facts and procedural history, so anyone picking up the report has the story in one page.
3. Issues framed — the questions the matter actually turns on, each cross-referenced to the grounds that answer it.
4. Grounds — the numbered arguments for your side, each with its strength badge, full argument with inline citation chips, and a "They will answer with" cross-link to the opposing arguments that attack it.
5. Anticipated opposing arguments — what the other side will run, as they would put it, each followed by your rebuttal in a green callout with its own authorities.
6. Neutral judicial evaluation — an honest, side-blind read: strengths, vulnerabilities, likely bench questions, and an overall assessment with a confidence direction (leaning favourable / balanced / leaning unfavourable).
7. Provisions engaged — the statutory provisions in play and what each does for the matter.
8. Evidence gaps — what the record is missing, why it matters, and how to cure it (each gap tagged with the grounds it affects).
9. Speaking notes — a condensed spoken-argument skeleton, ground by ground.
10. Cross-examination questions — lines of questioning drawn from the record, each with its tactical purpose.

Read the neutral evaluation first

It's tempting to start with your grounds — they're flattering. Start with the neutral evaluation instead: the vulnerabilities list and the likely bench questions tell you what to prepare before the judge asks. Then work the evidence gaps while there's still time to cure them.

Inline citation chips

Throughout the memo, cited authorities appear as numbered chips in the prose. Click any chip to open the authority — its citation, holding summary, pinpoint paragraphs, verification status, and treatment history. The numbering is stable across the whole report, so [3] is the same case everywhere it appears.

Always verify against the source

The report is preparation support, not legal advice. Every authority is linked so a click confirms it — read the key cases yourself before the hearing, starting with anything the trust badges flag.

Next steps

• Verified Authorities — what the verification and treatment badges mean, and how to act on them.
• Scenarios — stress-test the report against the contingencies that worry you.
• Moot Court — argue the report against an AI bench before you argue it for real.

Open Case Strategy