Human-centered design systems and product experiences
Core services
01UI/UX Design02Web Development03Software Development042D/3D Experiences05App Development06AI Agents & Automation07Website DesignTechnical services
Frontend Engineering
React DevelopmentNext.js DevelopmentWeb ApplicationsEnterprise DashboardsSaaS PlatformsBackend & Infrastructure
API DevelopmentCloud InfrastructureDevOps & CI/CDBackend SystemsCustom SoftwareIndustries we serve
Technology & Software
AI Legal Matter Intake Agent Development
The facts in order before a lawyer reads
An agent for a law firm's or legal department's front door.
An agent for a law firm's or legal department's front door. It collects the initial facts and documents of a new matter, prepares what a conflict check needs, and routes the enquiry to the right lawyer with a clear summary. It gives no legal advice and forms no view on the merits.
A new enquiry reaches a law firm as a long voicemail or a short web form. A fee earner calls back, spends half an hour establishing the basics, and discovers the firm does not do that kind of work, or is conflicted. Enquiries the firm would want wait three days for that call. Inside a company, the legal team receives requests with no contract attached and no deadline stated.
This page describes a workflow we propose to build as a custom project. It does not exist as software yet. It would reuse the question-by-question intake from our lead qualification demonstration, the document handling from our invoice demonstration and the handover with a summary that runs in all our conversation demonstrations. Practice-area routing, conflict-check preparation and connection to a practice system are not built.
Six Things That Slow This Down
Half an hour to learn the basics
Fee earners do intake at fee-earner cost.
Wrong kind of matter
The firm does not handle it, and learns that on the call.
Conflicts found late
Work begins before the check is done.
Deadlines missed at the door
A limitation date passes while the enquiry waits.
Advice by accident
Someone at intake says what the caller should do.
Confidential details in the wrong place
Sensitive facts are sent through an open form.
Six jobs it carries through
Structured intake
Collects the initial facts.
- Who is asking and in what capacity
- What happened, in their words
- Dates, including any deadline they mention
- Asked by matter type
Party identification
Collects what a conflict check needs.
- The enquirer and related parties
- The other side, as named
- Companies and their groups
- Prepared as a check request
Document collection
Gathers the first documents.
- The contract, letter or notice
- Uploaded securely
- Dates and parties read with their source
- Nothing reviewed for legal effect
Deadline flag
Flags dates that may matter.
- Dates the enquirer mentions
- Dates on documents received
- Marked for a lawyer at once
- No calculation of legal time limits
Routing
Sends the enquiry to the right person.
- Practice area by your rules
- Matters you do not take, with your approved reply
- Urgent matters first
- A summary for the lawyer
Enquirer communication
Tells the enquirer what happens next.
- Acknowledgement and reference
- Who will be in touch and when
- No statement about their position
- A clear notice that no advice has been given
Walk One Real Case Through It
Thirty minutes, one case from your own process. We map it against the workflow on this page and tell you plainly what can be reused from our demonstrations and what has to be built for your systems.
How One Request Moves Through
An example of one case, in 6 steps. The same steps play in the picture at the top of this page.
Enquiry arrives
Someone writes through the firm's site about a dispute with a former employer.
Facts collected
The agent asks who they are, what happened and whether they have received any documents.
Parties recorded
The employer's name and group are captured for a conflict-check request.
Document received
A letter with a response date is uploaded. The date is flagged for a lawyer immediately.
Routed
The enquiry goes to the employment team with the summary, the letter and the flagged date.
Enquirer told
They receive a reference, the name of the team and a statement that no advice has been given yet.
Where It Connects
The systems named here are the kind this agent works with. Which ones it connects to in your case is settled in the scope.
Practice management
- Clio
- LEAP
- iManage
- or your system
Conflict checks
- Your conflict database and process
Documents
- Secure upload and storage
Intake channels
- Website
- phone
Routing rules
- Practice areas and the matters you accept
Lawyers
- The people who decide whether to act
Intake Is Not Advice
The agent collects and organises. It does not tell an enquirer what their rights are, whether they have a case or what to do next, and it says so. Time limits in law are matters of professional judgement, so it flags dates for a lawyer and calculates none.
What an enquirer tells a law firm is confidential and may be privileged. The channels, storage and access are designed with your firm's own professional rules in mind.
- No legal advice, stated plainly
- Facts recorded, not assessed
- Dates flagged for a lawyer
- Conflict checks decided by the firm
- Confidential channels and storage
- A lawyer decides whether to act
Asked Before the First Call
No. It gathers facts and documents and routes them. It tells the enquirer clearly that it is not a lawyer and has not given advice. Whether there is a case, and what to do, is for a qualified lawyer.
Contract review works on a document and compares it with your playbook. Intake works on a person's enquiry and gets it to the right lawyer with the facts in order. A new matter often needs intake first and review later.
Qualification applies commercial criteria. Legal intake has duties that a sales process does not: conflicts, confidentiality, urgency of dates and the rule against giving advice. Those shape every step.
Not as software yet. This page describes a proposed workflow. It would reuse the question-by-question intake from our lead qualification demonstration, the document handling from our invoice demonstration and the handover with a summary that runs in all our conversation demonstrations. Practice-area routing, conflict-check preparation and connection to a practice system are not built. A project starts by mapping your process, then proving the first steps on test data before anything touches a live system.
Review Last Month's New Enquiries
Note how long each waited for a first call, and how many turned out to be matters you do not take.