matter-intake

---
name: matter-intake
description: Intake a new matter — uniform questions covering identification, conflicts, source, risk triage, materiality, external solicitors, owners, legal hold, and key dates; writes matter.md and history.md and appends a structured row to _log.yaml. Use when the user says "new matter", "intake this matter", or wants to bring a new matter into the portfolio.
argument-hint: "[optional matter name]"
---

# /matter-intake

1. Load `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` → risk calibration (for triage), landscape (for context, conflicts method), stakeholders (for who to loop in).
2. Follow the workflow and reference below.
3. Run the uniform intake: identification, conflicts check, source, risk triage, materiality, external solicitors, internal owners, legal hold, key dates, initial posture.
4. Generate slug from matter name (lowercase, hyphens, year).
5. Create `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/matters/[slug]/matter.md` — full narrative intake.
6. Create `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/matters/[slug]/history.md` — seeded with the intake as the first entry.
7. Append structured row to `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/matters/_log.yaml`.
8. Confirm with the user: "Here's the row I'll write — any edits?"

---

# Matter Intake

## Purpose

Every new matter goes through the same intake so the portfolio stays comparable. Uniform rows in `_log.yaml` let the status skill roll up. Narrative in `matter.md` captures what the row can't. History file seeded here becomes the event record.

## Load context

- `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` — risk calibration (triage thresholds, materiality, settlement ladder), landscape (stakeholders, external solicitors bench).
- `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/matters/_log.yaml` — to confirm slug uniqueness.

## The intake

### 1. Identification

- Matter name (as commonly referenced, e.g., "Acme v. Us 2026")
- Counterparty
- Matter type: `contract | employment | ip | regulatory | investigation | product | other`
- Our role: `claimant | defendant | applicant | respondent | investigated`
  - If the practice profile's `## Side` is `claimant`, `defendant`, or a "both — default X" variant, pre-fill the role from that default and confirm. If `## Side` is `varies by matter`, ask cold. Never silently assume a posture the practice profile hasn't set.
  - The role drives downstream skills: claimant-posture matters route risk triage to case value / CFA/DBA economics; defendant-posture matters route to exposure / reserves / insurance tender.
- Jurisdiction (court, arbitration forum, or regulatory body — England & Wales / Scotland / Northern Ireland / other)

### 2. Conflicts check

Before going further, run the conflicts step per `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` → Conflicts clearance.

- **Status:** `cleared | pending | not-run | waived`
- **Method:** match what `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` declares (`corporate-legal | outside-solicitors | system-check | informal | other`). If the declared method is `informal`, say so — the record still captures that a counsel's-judgment check was the basis.
- **Cleared by:** name / team / firm
- **Cleared date:** YYYY-MM-DD
- **Checked against:** brief list of the specific names/entities run (counterparty, known affiliates, adverse counsel if known, key witnesses). Thin is fine; "no" is not.
- **Notes:** anything flagged but cleared (e.g., "Smith on our board sat on counterparty's board 2019–2021 — cleared as non-overlapping to this matter").

Behaviour by status:

- `cleared` → proceed.
- `pending` → proceed with intake; flag prominently in `matter.md` and in the log row that conflicts are outstanding; surface again on every `/matter-update` and in `/portfolio-status` until resolved.
- `waived` → rare; requires a conflict-waiver rationale (writing the waiver is outside this skill — capture that one exists, who signed it, and where it lives).
- `not-run` → **STOP. This is a gate.** The skill will not create `matter.md`, `history.md`, or a `_log.yaml` entry until the conflicts posture is resolved. Three acceptable paths:

  **Path 1 — Run conflicts now.** Pause this intake. Clear per `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` Conflicts clearance. Return with `status: cleared` or `status: waived` with rationale.

  **Path 2 — Mark pending with owner + due date.** Allowed only when `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` Conflicts clearance declares parallel-intake acceptable. Capture: who is running conflicts, when they're expected to return, what entities they're checking. Intake proceeds; matter row carries `conflicts.status: pending`; `/portfolio-status` flags it every run; `/matter-update` re-prompts until resolved.

  **Path 3 — Bypass with documented rationale.** Only if the user explicitly acknowledges the bypass. Record in `conflicts.override`:

  ```yaml
  conflicts:
    status: not-run               # preserved as-is
    override:
      by: [user name]
      date: [YYYY-MM-DD]
      rationale: [why conflicts were bypassed — permanent record; does not auto-expire]
  ```

  This field is visible in every `/portfolio-status`, every `/matter-briefing`, and every `/matter-update` until removed. It is never removed by the skill — only by explicit user edit to `_log.yaml` after conflicts are actually cleared.

  **Do not proceed silently.** "I'll do it later" is not an acceptable response. One of Path 1/2/3 must be chosen, and the choice is captured in the record.

This step is not about the skill deciding whether a conflict exists — that's the user's/firm's judgment. It's about making sure the check happened and the record reflects it.

### 3. Source

How did this arrive?
- `letter-before-action | letter-of-claim | proceedings-served | witness-summons | regulator-inquiry | internal-report | pre-suit-threat`
- *Seed doc opportunity:* "If you have the initiating document (claim form, letter before action, witness summons), attach or share the path. It sharpens the intake."

### 4. Risk triage — against house calibration

- Severity: high | medium | low (reference the `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` severity bands)
- Likelihood: high | medium | low (reference the `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` likelihood bands)
- Resulting risk rating (per the matrix): high | medium | low | critical
- Damages exposure range (best estimate in sterling)
- Non-monetary exposure (injunction? undertaking? publicity? precedent? regulatory sanction?)

If the risk calibration in `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` is thin, don't fake precision. Use the user's gut and note the thinness.

### 5. Materiality

Against the house thresholds in `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md`:
- `reserved | disclosed | monitored | none`
- If `reserved`: reserve amount and whether finance has been notified
- If `disclosed`: filing and footnote location

### 6. External solicitors

- Firm
- Lead solicitor
- **Lead solicitor email** (used by `/oc-status` to draft status requests)
- Engagement letter status: `signed | pending | none`
- Budget authorisation: amount and approver
- Instructed counsel (barristers): name / chambers (if already instructed)
- *Seed doc opportunity:* "Engagement letter path, if signed."

If risk is medium or higher and no external solicitors are assigned — flag it.

### 7. Internal owners

From `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/CLAUDE.md` landscape — which internal stakeholders are involved?
- Business lead
- HR partner (if employment)
- Comms contact (if reputational risk)
- CISO (if data or cyber)
- Other

### 8. Legal hold

- Issued? If yes: date, scope, custodians (list of names).
- Next refresh date (default: six months from issuance; adjust per matter).
- If no and this is active litigation or reasonably anticipated: flag urgently; offer to run `/litigation-legal-uk:legal-hold [slug] --issue` after intake completes. Preservation duty under English law attaches when litigation is reasonably anticipated — do not delay.
- *Seed doc opportunity:* "Preservation notice, if issued."

### 9. Key dates

- CPR response deadline (acknowledgment of service, defence, or application)
- Next hearing / conference date
- Limitation period cutoff (if applicable — Limitation Act 1980 or applicable Scottish / NI rules)
- Any regulatory deadlines
- Pre-action protocol compliance deadline

### 10. Initial posture

One-paragraph theory:
- What's our story?
- What's theirs?
- What's the pivot fact?
- Initial posture: `fight | settle | investigate | wait`
- Applicable CPR pre-action protocol (or default Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct)

## Writing the outputs

### Slug

Lowercase, hyphens, year at the end. Examples: `acme-v-us-2026`, `employment-smith-2026`, `cma-inquiry-2026`.

Confirm slug is unique in `_log.yaml` before writing.

### `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/matters/[slug]/matter.md`

```markdown
[WORK-PRODUCT HEADER — per plugin config ## Outputs — differs by role; see `## Who's using this`]

# [Matter Name]

**Slug:** [slug]
**Opened:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Our role:** [claimant/defendant/etc.]
**Status:** [status]

---

## Identification

[counterparty, jurisdiction, matter type, source]

## Conflicts

**Status:** [cleared / pending / not-run / waived]
**Method:** [corporate-legal / outside-solicitors / system-check / informal / other]
**Cleared by:** [name]
**Cleared date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Checked against:** [entities run]
**Notes:** [any flags cleared, waiver reference if applicable]

## Risk triage

**Severity:** [band] — [why, with reference to house severity definitions]
**Likelihood:** [band] — [why]
**Risk rating:** [high/medium/low/critical]
**Exposure:** [sterling range + non-monetary]

## Materiality

[reserved/disclosed/monitored/none — with reserve amount, disclosure location, or reasoning if "none"]

## External solicitors

[firm, lead solicitor, engagement status, budget; instructed counsel if applicable]

## Internal owners

[stakeholders and why each is involved]

## Legal hold

[status, date, scope]

## Key dates

[list — including CPR deadlines, pre-action protocol deadlines, limitation cutoff]

## Initial theory

[one paragraph: our story, their story, pivot fact, initial posture, applicable pre-action protocol] `[SME VERIFY — theory at intake is a working hypothesis; confirm with external solicitors/counsel before any filing or material communication that assumes this framing]`

## Open questions

[anything not yet known that matters — e.g., "insurance tender pending", "unclear whether we have coverage for X"]

---

## Seed documents

| Doc | Path / pointer |
|---|---|
| [e.g., claim form / letter before action] | [path or "not yet shared"] |
```

### `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/matters/[slug]/history.md`

Seed the history file with the intake as entry zero:

```markdown
# History: [Matter Name]

Append-only event log. Most recent at top.

---

## [YYYY-MM-DD] — Matter opened

[Source, who brought it in, initial triage summary, external solicitors assigned, legal hold issued yes/no. Pre-action protocol identified: [name / default Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct].]
```

### Append to `~/.claude/plugins/config/uk-legal-plugins/litigation-legal-uk/matters/_log.yaml`

Add a row per the schema. Example:

```yaml
- id: acme-v-us-2026
  name: "Acme Corp v. Company"
  type: contract
  role: defendant
  counterparty: "Acme Corp"
  jurisdiction: "King's Bench Division, High Court"
  # status is derived from source:
  #   source: pre-suit-threat | letter-before-action           → status: threatened
  #   source: proceedings-served | witness-summons | regulator-inquiry → status: active
  #   source: internal-report                                  → status: threatened (default) or active if formal process has started
  status: active
  stage: pleadings
  source: proceedings-served
  pre_action_protocol: "Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims"
  outside_counsel:
    firm: "Linklaters LLP"
    lead: "J. Reyes"
    email: "jreyes@linklaters.example.com"
    engagement: signed
    instructed_counsel: null
  conflicts:
    status: cleared
    method: corporate-legal
    cleared_by: "K. Patel"
    cleared_date: 2026-04-20
    override:                   # populated only on Path 3 bypass
      by: null
      date: null
      rationale: null
  risk: high
  materiality: reserved
  exposure_range: "£2M–£5M"
  internal_owners:
    business_lead: "Jane Smith"
    hr_partner: null
    comms_contact: null
  legal_hold:
    issued: true
    issued_date: 2026-02-15
    scope: "Sales org 2023–2026"
    custodians: ["Jane Smith", "R. Chen", "T. Patel"]
    last_refresh: 2026-02-15
    next_refresh: 2026-08-15
    released: null
  related_matters: []
  opened: 2026-04-20
  next_deadline: 2026-05-15
  last_updated: 2026-04-20
  path: matters/acme-v-us-2026/
```

## Confirm before writing

Show the user the row and the matter.md content:

> Here's what I'll write. Flag anything wrong or thin before I commit.

## Close with the next-steps decision tree

End with the next-steps decision tree per CLAUDE.md `## Outputs`. Customise the options to what this skill just produced — the five default branches (draft the X, escalate, get more facts, watch and wait, something else) are a starting point, not a lock-in. The tree is the output; the lawyer picks.

## What this skill does not do

- **Run the conflicts check itself.** It records the result, status, method, and the entities checked. The actual clearance happens in whatever system (or judgment) the house practice profile declares. If the user says "cleared," the skill takes that at face value and captures the metadata.
- Decide the initial theory. It captures what the user says; it doesn't invent one.
- Issue the legal hold. Flags it if missing. User issues it.
- Identify the applicable CPR track (small claims / fast track / multi-track). The matter-level intake captures jurisdiction and claim value — track allocation is a procedural step for external solicitors at the case management stage.