Corpl Cold Start Interview

When to use

Use this at the very start of a new matter — a contemplated acquisition, an entity clean-up, a governance question — when you know little and need the facts before choosing a workflow. A disciplined intake prevents work built on wrong assumptions and surfaces conflicts and privilege issues early.

Not for: a matter already scoped and underway (use the specific corpl- skill); giving legal advice during intake (intake gathers facts, it does not opine); resolving a conflict of interest — that is escalated to counsel immediately. This skill produces a fact record, not a legal conclusion.

Method

1. Identify who and what. Client entity, requesting person and role, and the business objective in their words.
2. Screen for conflicts and privilege early. Capture all parties and adverse parties. Decision point: any potential conflict → stop and escalate to counsel before proceeding.
3. Establish the transaction/matter shape. Type, target or counterparty, structure if known, and stage.
4. Capture the entity picture. Jurisdiction of formation, entity type, cap table basics, subsidiaries, and where it operates.
5. Pin down constraints. Timeline and hard deadlines, budget, confidentiality/NDA status, and who the decision-makers are.
6. Ask what documents exist and where (data room, contracts, org docs) — inputs for downstream diligence.
7. Note open questions and unknowns explicitly, then confirm the fact record back to the requester for correction before any substantive work.

Example

Intake: founder of a Delaware C-corp exploring sale of the company. Requester: CEO. Objective: "sell within 6 months, keep the team." Conflict screen: no adverse party yet — clear. Structure: likely stock sale, no buyer identified. Entity: DE C-corp, ~14 stockholders, one wholly-owned subsidiary. Constraints: NDA required before sharing financials, board must approve, target close Q4. Documents: cap table and key contracts in Google Drive. Open: outstanding SAFEs unquantified — flagged. Confirmed back to CEO.

Pitfalls

• Skipping the conflict screen. The cheapest time to catch a conflict is before any work is done.
• Recording assumptions as facts. If the requester was unsure, mark it unknown.
• Giving advice mid-intake. Answering "should we…" during fact-gathering skips the analysis and the attorney gate.
• Not confirming the record. An unverified intake propagates errors into every downstream deliverable.

Output format

MATTER INTAKE — <matter name>
Client entity / requester / role:
Objective (client's words):
Conflict & privilege screen: clear | ESCALATE — <issue>
Transaction/matter type / stage / counterparty:
Entity: jurisdiction / type / cap table / subs / footprint:
Constraints: timeline / deadlines / budget / NDA / decision-makers:
Existing documents & location:
Open questions / unknowns:
Confirmed by requester: <date>
Next: <workflow / attorney assignment>

Reference

Intake sequence: identify client and objective, run the conflict and privilege screen first, then capture matter shape, entity picture, constraints, and document inventory. The conflict screen is a hard gate — a potential conflict stops intake and goes to counsel. The output is a fact record confirmed by the requester, feeding corpl-matter-workspace and the relevant diligence workflow. Nothing in intake constitutes legal advice.