Case Viability & Conflict Check Report
Internal privileged memo evaluating a prospective PI matter for case acceptance, conflict clearance, and resource commitment.
Prerequisites
- Intake summary — client name, adverse parties, incident date, injuries, objectives
- Supporting documents — police reports, medical records, photos, insurance info
- Firm conflict database — current/former clients, pending matters
- Fee parameters — contingency rates, cost-advance policy, minimum case value thresholds
Quick Start
- Gather intake summary and supporting documents
- Run conflict screen against all parties and entities
- Assess legal viability: claims, defenses, SOL, procedural bars
- Project damages and calculate cost-benefit
- Issue recommendation: ACCEPT / ACCEPT WITH CONDITIONS / DECLINE / DEFER
- Draft executive summary with privilege designation
Memo Sections
1. Factual Summary
- Chronological narrative of key events
- All parties identified (client, adverse parties, insurers, witnesses, related entities)
- Client's stated objectives
- Gap analysis:
| Missing Information |
Impact (H/M/L) |
Resolution Path |
| {item} |
{level} |
{method} |
2. Conflict of Interest Analysis
Screen every person/entity against firm databases.
Check: prospective client + affiliates, all adverse parties (named and anticipated), insurers/adjusters, key witnesses, subject matter overlap.
For each conflict found:
| Factor |
Analysis |
| Type |
Direct (Rule 1.7) / Former client (Rule 1.9) / Imputed (Rule 1.10) / Prospective (Rule 1.18) |
| Affected matter |
{identify specifically} |
| Waivable? |
Yes — informed written consent / No — {reason} |
| Proposed cure |
Screening wall / Client consent / Decline |
If clear: state affirmatively with search date range and scope. Flag jurisdiction-specific RPC variations with [VERIFY].
3. Legal Viability
A. Causes of Action — For each claim, table elements vs. supporting/undermining facts and available evidence.
B. Anticipated Defenses — For each defense (comparative negligence, assumption of risk, etc.), assess likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategy.
C. Statute of Limitations
- Applicable statute with citation
- Accrual date and basis
- Tolling doctrines (discovery rule, minority, incapacity)
- Filing deadline: {exact date}
- Urgency: > 6 months / < 6 months / < 90 days / EXPIRED
D. Procedural Requirements
E. Red Flags
4. Financial Viability
Damages projection — estimate low/mid/high for: past medical specials, future medical, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, pain & suffering, punitive (if applicable).
Cost-benefit analysis — projected attorney hours, fee arrangement, hard costs (filing, depositions, experts), total firm investment, expected recovery × probability of success, ROI ratio.
Collectability — assess insurance coverage, defendant assets, judgment-proofing concerns.
Resource check:
5. Recommendation
One of:
- ACCEPT — conditions listed
- ACCEPT WITH CONDITIONS — specify prerequisites (waivers, retainer, investigation)
- DECLINE — specific reasons + referral suggestions
- DEFER — specify information needed + decision deadline
Rationale: synthesize conflict status, legal merit, financial viability, and strategic alignment in 2-3 paragraphs.
6. Executive Summary
- 3-5 bullet key findings
- One-sentence recommendation
- Report date, preparing attorney, contributors
- Sources consulted and search scope
- Time-sensitive deadlines flagged
- Privilege designation: Attorney-Client Privileged / Work Product
Pitfalls & Rules
- Candor — internal document; sugar-coating risks harms the firm
- SOL precision — calculate deadlines exactly; flag < 90 days as urgent
- Collectability — never assume; verify insurance and assets
- Ethics rules — apply Model Rules of Professional Conduct; mark jurisdiction-specific variations with [VERIFY]
- Minimum case value — for contingency fees, apply firm threshold before recommending acceptance
- Citations — mark any unverifiable legal citation with [VERIFY]
- Privilege — state "Attorney-Client Privileged / Work Product" explicitly in output
1---2name: case-viability-report3description: Produces internal case viability and conflict check memos for personal injury litigation intake. Screens conflicts, assesses liability and damages, checks statute of limitations, and outputs an accept/decline recommendation. Use when evaluating new PI intake, running conflict checks, assessing case merit pre-filing, or preparing acceptance memos.4license: Apache-2.05---67# Case Viability & Conflict Check Report89Internal privileged memo evaluating a prospective PI matter for case acceptance, conflict clearance, and resource commitment.1011## Prerequisites1213- **Intake summary** — client name, adverse parties, incident date, injuries, objectives14- **Supporting documents** — police reports, medical records, photos, insurance info15- **Firm conflict database** — current/former clients, pending matters16- **Fee parameters** — contingency rates, cost-advance policy, minimum case value thresholds1718## Quick Start19201. Gather intake summary and supporting documents212. Run conflict screen against all parties and entities223. Assess legal viability: claims, defenses, SOL, procedural bars234. Project damages and calculate cost-benefit245. Issue recommendation: ACCEPT / ACCEPT WITH CONDITIONS / DECLINE / DEFER256. Draft executive summary with privilege designation2627## Memo Sections2829### 1. Factual Summary3031- Chronological narrative of key events32- All parties identified (client, adverse parties, insurers, witnesses, related entities)33- Client's stated objectives34- Gap analysis:3536| Missing Information | Impact (H/M/L) | Resolution Path |37|---|---|---|38| {item} | {level} | {method} |3940### 2. Conflict of Interest Analysis4142Screen every person/entity against firm databases.4344**Check:** prospective client + affiliates, all adverse parties (named and anticipated), insurers/adjusters, key witnesses, subject matter overlap.4546**For each conflict found:**4748| Factor | Analysis |49|---|---|50| Type | Direct (Rule 1.7) / Former client (Rule 1.9) / Imputed (Rule 1.10) / Prospective (Rule 1.18) |51| Affected matter | {identify specifically} |52| Waivable? | Yes — informed written consent / No — {reason} |53| Proposed cure | Screening wall / Client consent / Decline |5455If clear: state affirmatively with search date range and scope. Flag jurisdiction-specific RPC variations with [VERIFY].5657### 3. Legal Viability5859**A. Causes of Action** — For each claim, table elements vs. supporting/undermining facts and available evidence.6061**B. Anticipated Defenses** — For each defense (comparative negligence, assumption of risk, etc.), assess likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategy.6263**C. Statute of Limitations**6465- Applicable statute with citation66- Accrual date and basis67- Tolling doctrines (discovery rule, minority, incapacity)68- **Filing deadline: {exact date}**69- Urgency: > 6 months / < 6 months / < 90 days / EXPIRED7071**D. Procedural Requirements**7273- [ ] Subject matter and personal jurisdiction74- [ ] Venue proper75- [ ] Administrative exhaustion (if applicable)76- [ ] Pre-suit notice requirements (e.g., government tort claims)77- [ ] Mandatory arbitration clauses78- [ ] Standing confirmed7980**E. Red Flags**8182- [ ] Client credibility concerns83- [ ] Prior claims / litigation history84- [ ] Social media contradicting injury claims85- [ ] Pre-existing conditions overlapping claimed injuries86- [ ] Adverse precedent in controlling jurisdiction87- [ ] Uncooperative or unreachable client88- [ ] Criminal exposure or parallel proceedings89- [ ] Gaps in medical treatment9091### 4. Financial Viability9293**Damages projection** — estimate low/mid/high for: past medical specials, future medical, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, pain & suffering, punitive (if applicable).9495**Cost-benefit analysis** — projected attorney hours, fee arrangement, hard costs (filing, depositions, experts), total firm investment, expected recovery × probability of success, ROI ratio.9697**Collectability** — assess insurance coverage, defendant assets, judgment-proofing concerns.9899**Resource check:**100101- [ ] Firm has subject-matter expertise102- [ ] Staffing capacity available103- [ ] Co-counsel needed? (if so, identified)104- [ ] Strategic value beyond fees (reputation, referral source, precedent)105106### 5. Recommendation107108One of:109110- **ACCEPT** — conditions listed111- **ACCEPT WITH CONDITIONS** — specify prerequisites (waivers, retainer, investigation)112- **DECLINE** — specific reasons + referral suggestions113- **DEFER** — specify information needed + decision deadline114115Rationale: synthesize conflict status, legal merit, financial viability, and strategic alignment in 2-3 paragraphs.116117### 6. Executive Summary118119- 3-5 bullet key findings120- One-sentence recommendation121- Report date, preparing attorney, contributors122- Sources consulted and search scope123- Time-sensitive deadlines flagged124- Privilege designation: *Attorney-Client Privileged / Work Product*125126## Pitfalls & Rules127128- **Candor** — internal document; sugar-coating risks harms the firm129- **SOL precision** — calculate deadlines exactly; flag < 90 days as urgent130- **Collectability** — never assume; verify insurance and assets131- **Ethics rules** — apply Model Rules of Professional Conduct; mark jurisdiction-specific variations with [VERIFY]132- **Minimum case value** — for contingency fees, apply firm threshold before recommending acceptance133- **Citations** — mark any unverifiable legal citation with [VERIFY]134- **Privilege** — state "Attorney-Client Privileged / Work Product" explicitly in output