Conflict review

Conflict review is a decision about whether the firm may take on prospective work. A supervising attorney records the reviewer, review date, decision and supporting evidence against the matter. The available outcomes distinguish Clear from Conflict and a request for more information. The intake and matter stay connected to that review, so the acceptance reviewer can check the actual clearance record rather than relying on a verbal assurance.

Consider a proposed filing matter involving an existing client and an opposing party. The coordinator submits the requested scope. The attorney checks the parties and records that more information is needed when the available detail is insufficient. The intake does not advance to engagement. Once the missing detail is obtained, the attorney records the outcome with evidence. Only a Clear decision permits the acceptance step.

• Named reviewer. Each conflict record includes the reviewer and the date of the check.
• Explicit outcome. Clear, Conflict and a request for more information represent distinct instructions for the team.
• Durable consequence. The workflow keeps an operation receipt and a decision event for every outcome on the matter.

Decide which supervising attorneys can clear each practice area and what evidence they must record. Agree how client eligibility notes and the matter’s counterparty reference are checked against the firm’s own conflict sources. If another conflict system is used, decide how its result is referenced in the matter. The attorney still records the decision the team will rely on here.

Define the response to a request for more information. The coordinator should know who must supply the missing fact and when the attorney should repeat the review. A Conflict outcome should produce a clear stop and a communication owner. Acceptance reviewers need a simple rule: a general note saying that someone checked conflicts does not replace a Clear decision with reviewer and evidence.

Rehearse three prospective matters, one for each outcome. Start each with a submitted intake and a matter in conflict review. Have the supervising attorney enter the dated decision and evidence. Check that the operation receipt and decision event remain on the matter for each path, including the stopped paths. Then ask the Operations Reviewer to attempt acceptance for each case.

Only the Clear case should move into engagement review. For the case needing more information, the reviewer should be able to point to the missing detail before the coordinator follows up. For Conflict, the team should retain the recorded outcome and keep the prospective work out of active execution. This rehearsal tests the actual decision boundary, not just the appearance of a queue.

• Conflicts needing information — Reviews waiting for the facts needed to decide.
• Cleared conflicts — Dated Clear outcomes with the reviewer and evidence.

See conflict and engagement and the access plan.