Extract Client Intake Facts Divorce Scenario 01

Skill: Extract Client Intake Facts — Divorce/Family Law Scenario

2. Failure modes the skill is correcting

• Agents accept the client's characterization of assets, debts, and support history without separating what is stated from what must be verified
• Agents miss that multiple people, accounts, periods, or transactions may need separate treatment rather than one blended summary
• Agents identify an issue but stop at description, without stating why it matters and what fact should be checked next
• Agents omit the governing family-law doctrine, leaving the memo as a narrative instead of a legally useful intake extraction
• Agents fail to surface time-sensitive asset-movement or account-division issues that may require immediate action
• Agents assume the client is the support recipient or assume an asset is separate without testing the income, tracing, and document facts

3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply

• Prenuptial enforceability: evaluate execution timing relative to the wedding date, whether the client had meaningful opportunity to review, whether independent counsel was available or used, and whether any facts suggest voluntariness or disclosure concerns under the governing contract and family-law standards
• Separate property tracing: if inherited or premarital funds were deposited into joint accounts, spent on marital items, or used to improve jointly held property, flag characterization and tracing issues under the applicable marital-property rules
• Active versus passive appreciation: for premarital or separately claimed assets that increased in value during the marriage, distinguish growth from marital effort versus market movement or other passive causes
• Dissipation: identify personal spending routed through business accounts, unusual transfers, or expenditures that do not match the stated business purpose, and preserve records needed to test waste or dissipation under the governing marital-property doctrine
• Maintenance direction: compare both parties’ income and earning capacity facts rather than assuming the client receives support; determine whether support may flow to or from the client under the applicable maintenance statute or guideline framework
• Cryptocurrency and digital assets: if a spouse has transferred, hidden, or is likely to move digital assets, flag tracing, wallet review, transaction history review, and the need to consider interim preservation steps
• Retirement accounts: characterize accounts as marital or separate, identify whether a domestic-relations order or comparable court process is needed, and note tax or penalty exposure if division occurs outside the proper mechanism
• Debt and loan programs: if student loans or forgiveness programs are mentioned, test the stated employer type, repayment plan, and payment history against the program criteria before relying on any discharge or forgiveness assumption
• Prenup silence: if the agreement does not address assets acquired during marriage or a category of property at issue, flag the omission and assess whether default marital-property rules may control
• Governing authority should be named whenever a conclusion is drawn; cite the contract doctrine, statute, rule, or leading case that supports the proposition rather than stating the conclusion in bare form

4. Analytical scaffolds

• Separate the intake into discrete issue buckets and treat each bucket as an independent verification exercise
• Identify each party, each account, each asset class, and each time period that could change characterization or remedy
• For each asset or issue, capture three things: the client’s stated position, the legal concern raised, and the fact to verify next
• Where source facts include timing, compare dates to the marriage, separation, signing, transfer, or payment events that matter under the governing rule
• Where source facts include income, identify both parties’ income picture and test support direction rather than presuming the client’s role
• Where source facts include money movement, trace the source, destination, and remaining balance before treating the funds as separate or marital
• Where source facts include business expenses or account activity, separate ordinary business spending from items that look personal, connected-party, or otherwise inconsistent with the stated purpose
• Where source facts include retirement, digital assets, or loan programs, note the process requirement and the evidence needed to avoid tax, penalty, or eligibility errors

5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships

• Build the memo in issue order, but within each issue preserve chronology: acquisition, marriage, transfer, use, separation, and any post-separation movement
• Distinguish premarital, marital, and post-separation facts whenever the timing affects characterization or relief
• For contested support or property issues, show the relationship between account history, income history, and the requested remedy
• When multiple documents conflict, identify the source of the conflict and do not merge the statements into one fact unless the discrepancy is resolved
• When the same asset appears in multiple places, cross-reference the references so the reader can see whether it is the same item, a related item, or a distinct account or holding
• When urgency exists because assets may move or accounts may be divided, place that timing fact near the relevant issue rather than burying it in a general narrative

6. Output structure conventions

• Produce a structured key-facts memo, not a prose summary
• Use conventional family-law intake headings such as parties, marriage and separation, agreement history, assets, debts, income/support, transactions of concern, and immediate action items
• For each issue, state the client’s reported fact, the legal significance, and the next investigative step
• Include a separate subsection for facts needing verification or follow-up so the decision-maker can see gaps clearly
• If more than one party, account, property type, transfer, or time period is in play, list them separately rather than collapsing them into one blended paragraph
• Include the governing legal authority or doctrine by name when flagging each issue, but keep the memo focused on extraction rather than advocacy
• End with concise action-oriented follow-up points identifying what should be requested, reviewed, or preserved next