Independent review

A matter’s status tells the team where the case sits, but it does not carry the full review decision. Review decisions records the source matter, source revision, reviewer, decision, time, reason and evidence reference. The Supervising Attorney can approve, return or reject the work while retaining the context that was actually reviewed. A pending decision identifies work awaiting judgment. A later correction receives a new revision and its own decision rather than overwriting the earlier one.

The role boundary is deliberate. Matter Coordinators prepare case records, events, attachments and deadlines. Supervising Attorneys make the independent review entry. Assign review to an attorney who did not prepare the work. That separation matters especially when a delivery or deadline depends on the approval: the record should identify a human decision for the exact source revision.

• Review queue. Find pending decisions and open the linked case with its events, attachments and state history.
• Decision entry. Record approve, return or reject with a reason and evidence reference against the reviewed revision.
• Follow-up. Return the case for correction or proceed to the recorded outcome only after the reviewer has made the decision.

Agree who counts as an independent reviewer for each organization and which preparation actions make someone ineligible to approve. Define what evidence reference is needed for a complete decision and what a useful return reason must tell the coordinator. Decide how the team handles a reviewer who is unavailable while a deadline approaches. Reassign review responsibility explicitly so the next reviewer can see the exact case and revision without inheriting an unexplained decision.

For example, a coordinator submits an active matter after verifying its supporting documents. The Supervising Attorney opens the case, compares the pending review to the event lines and decides to Return because one source reference is wrong. The coordinator corrects that line and resubmits the changed revision. The attorney can then Approve the new revision with a reason. Both decisions remain attributable to their respective revisions.

Compare the latest decision with the matter’s current revision before recording delivery. Check the reviewer, decision date, reason and evidence reference. If the decision says Return or Reject, the handoff should point to corrected work, not an executed outcome. If the decision is Approve, the operation trace should refer to the same accepted revision. An approval for an earlier revision cannot silently cover a changed case.

An Auditor can read the decision history alongside state history and the associated operation receipts. That comparison answers who made a decision, what source version they reviewed and what happened afterward. It also distinguishes the review decision from a later execution failure that may need reconciliation.

• Pending decisions — Reviewer work tied to a source matter and revision.
• Decision history — Approved, returned and rejected outcomes with reasons and reviewers.
• Matters awaiting review — Cases currently in the review stage.

Read independent review and correction review for the decision and resubmission path.