When to use
Use this when you meet a new client with no prior context and must extract a coherent picture in one sitting. The aim is to get the full story, spot legal issues, build a timeline, inventory documents, and learn what the client actually wants — without prematurely narrowing.
Not for: demand-specific intake once a claim is chosen (see litig-demand-intake) or evaluating a received demand (see litig-demand-received).
Method
- Open with a narrative prompt: let the client tell the whole story uninterrupted first, then probe.
- Run a conflicts check on every party and entity name before going deep.
- Build a dated timeline of events, capturing who did what and when.
- Identify legal issues emerging from the facts — flag, don't yet resolve.
- Inventory documents, communications, and potential witnesses; ask what exists and where.
- Decision point: if a limitations or notice deadline looks imminent, stop and escalate to the attorney before the meeting ends.
- Decision point: if a conflict surfaces, pause substantive intake until it is cleared.
- Elicit the client's goals and constraints (money, vindication, speed, relationship, budget).
- Explain confidentiality and next steps; set expectations about scope and engagement.
- Route your issue-spotting summary to a supervising attorney before giving the client any assessment of the claim's strength.
Example
Prospective client describes a partnership souring over misused funds. You take the narrative, run conflicts on both partners and the LLC, timeline the capital contributions and withdrawals, flag possible breach-of-fiduciary-duty and conversion issues, list bank records and the operating agreement to collect, and learn the client wants a buyout, not a public fight.
Pitfalls
- Leading the witness. Feeding the client a theory shapes their memory; use open questions before closed ones.
- Skipping conflicts. Substantive discussion before a conflicts check can disqualify the firm and breach ethics rules.
- Premature advice. Assessing the claim's merits in the first meeting, before facts are verified, risks wrong and unauthorized advice.
- No document plan. Leaving without a concrete list of what to collect and preserve stalls the matter and risks spoliation.
Output format
CLIENT: <name / entity>
CONFLICTS CHECK: <cleared / pending>
NARRATIVE SUMMARY: <the story, client's words>
TIMELINE: <dated events>
ISSUES SPOTTED: <flagged theories>
DOCUMENTS / WITNESSES: <inventory + location>
DEADLINES: <limitations / notice>
CLIENT GOALS: <outcome, budget, constraints>
NEXT STEPS: <collection / hold / engagement>
ATTORNEY REVIEW: <pending / cleared>
Reference
Under ABA Model Rule 1.18, prospective clients receive duties of confidentiality even if no engagement follows — treat everything as privileged and screen carefully. Conflicts screening (Rules 1.7 and 1.9) must precede substantive discussion to avoid imputed disqualification. The attorney-client privilege attaches to communications for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, but the crime-fraud exception and waiver by third-party presence can defeat it. Begin preservation counseling early, since the duty to preserve arises when litigation is reasonably anticipated. Open-ended, non-leading questioning produces more reliable and admissible accounts. This is general information, not legal advice; ethics rules and privilege doctrine vary by jurisdiction and a licensed attorney must apply them to the specific matter.
1---2name: litig-cold-start-interview3description: Run an initial client interview from a cold start to elicit the story, issues, timeline, documents, and goals.4---56## When to use7Use this when you meet a new client with no prior context and must extract a coherent picture in one sitting. The aim is to get the full story, spot legal issues, build a timeline, inventory documents, and learn what the client actually wants — without prematurely narrowing.89**Not for:** demand-specific intake once a claim is chosen (see litig-demand-intake) or evaluating a received demand (see litig-demand-received).1011## Method121. Open with a narrative prompt: let the client tell the whole story uninterrupted first, then probe.132. Run a conflicts check on every party and entity name before going deep.143. Build a dated timeline of events, capturing who did what and when.154. Identify legal issues emerging from the facts — flag, don't yet resolve.165. Inventory documents, communications, and potential witnesses; ask what exists and where.176. **Decision point:** if a limitations or notice deadline looks imminent, stop and escalate to the attorney before the meeting ends.187. **Decision point:** if a conflict surfaces, pause substantive intake until it is cleared.198. Elicit the client's goals and constraints (money, vindication, speed, relationship, budget).209. Explain confidentiality and next steps; set expectations about scope and engagement.2110. Route your issue-spotting summary to a supervising attorney before giving the client any assessment of the claim's strength.2223## Example24> Prospective client describes a partnership souring over misused funds. You take the narrative, run conflicts on both partners and the LLC, timeline the capital contributions and withdrawals, flag possible breach-of-fiduciary-duty and conversion issues, list bank records and the operating agreement to collect, and learn the client wants a buyout, not a public fight.2526## Pitfalls27- **Leading the witness.** Feeding the client a theory shapes their memory; use open questions before closed ones.28- **Skipping conflicts.** Substantive discussion before a conflicts check can disqualify the firm and breach ethics rules.29- **Premature advice.** Assessing the claim's merits in the first meeting, before facts are verified, risks wrong and unauthorized advice.30- **No document plan.** Leaving without a concrete list of what to collect and preserve stalls the matter and risks spoliation.3132## Output format33```34CLIENT: <name / entity>35CONFLICTS CHECK: <cleared / pending>36NARRATIVE SUMMARY: <the story, client's words>37TIMELINE: <dated events>38ISSUES SPOTTED: <flagged theories>39DOCUMENTS / WITNESSES: <inventory + location>40DEADLINES: <limitations / notice>41CLIENT GOALS: <outcome, budget, constraints>42NEXT STEPS: <collection / hold / engagement>43ATTORNEY REVIEW: <pending / cleared>44```4546## Reference47Under ABA Model Rule 1.18, prospective clients receive duties of confidentiality even if no engagement follows — treat everything as privileged and screen carefully. Conflicts screening (Rules 1.7 and 1.9) must precede substantive discussion to avoid imputed disqualification. The attorney-client privilege attaches to communications for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, but the crime-fraud exception and waiver by third-party presence can defeat it. Begin preservation counseling early, since the duty to preserve arises when litigation is reasonably anticipated. Open-ended, non-leading questioning produces more reliable and admissible accounts. This is general information, not legal advice; ethics rules and privilege doctrine vary by jurisdiction and a licensed attorney must apply them to the specific matter.
Matrixx0070