Build a technology-dispute chronology from the correspondence
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- List each letter, ticket, and notice in date order, with the sender, the date, and the request it makes, using only documents in the file. Do not characterise breach or waiver.
- What the lawyer must review
- Formal Opinion 512 requires the lawyer to verify dates and quotations before the chronology is used in a demand or a pleading. Rule 1.6 keeps the correspondence inside a confidential tool. If the dispute is later filed in a district court, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b) is the lawyer’s certification, made after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, and the tool writes none of that pleading.
- Written for / version
- United States versionUS
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Consider narrowly defined preparation support after confirming the tool’s capability and permitted scope. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- Check the current court or regulator requirements, prescribed form and attachments for the intended document and filing.
- Confirm that the wording reflects the client’s instructions and contains no unintended admission, concession or commitment. Check the recipient and tone.
- Confirm that the actual tool, feature and processing terms permit use of this information, including access, retention, training and disclosure conditions.
- Verify dates, people and sequence against contemporaneous records. Preserve uncertainty and identify gaps or conflicting accounts.
- Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
- Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.