An injury claim can generate information from websites, insurer letters, court forms, statutes, agencies, friends, health-care providers, lawyers, and automated systems. Those sources do not have the same purpose or authority. A general explanation may be accurate but still unable to answer a deadline, responsibility, coverage, settlement, filing, or evidence question without the matter’s actual facts and documents.

An information-status record should identify the source, date, jurisdiction, audience, assumptions, question answered, facts not reviewed, relationship status, authorized scope, and the person responsible for the next decision.

Label the type of information before relying on it

  • Primary legal source, agency guidance, court form, insurer or opposing-party communication, medical information, professional advice, general educational material, informal suggestion, or unverified summary
  • Author or issuing body, title, URL or file, publication or effective date, access date, jurisdiction, version, later amendment, correction, expiration, and archive copy
  • General audience or named recipient, question addressed, stated assumptions, exceptions, cross-references, facts reviewed, facts not reviewed, and limits stated by the source
  • Action suggested or required, responsible person, source-based due date, decision authority, completion evidence, and unresolved interpretation question

Distinguish public information from a consultation

Public legal information can explain vocabulary, common documents, agencies, or general rules. It does not establish that a lawyer has reviewed a person’s facts or agreed to provide legal services. The North Carolina State Bar’s Rule 1.18 defines a prospective client and explains that whether a communication is a consultation can depend on the circumstances. The rule also addresses information learned from a prospective client even when no representation follows.

  • Date and method of contact, people participating, purpose, conflict-check status, documents requested or received, and confidentiality warning or agreement
  • Whether the communication was general information, intake, a consultation about possible representation, a decline, a referral, a request for more information, or another clearly described status
  • Exact questions discussed, facts or records supplied, assumptions and missing information, preliminary observations, and matters reserved for later review
  • Written next step, person responsible, date, follow-up method, and whether any deadline or preservation issue remains the person’s responsibility

Confirm whether representation exists and what it covers

A consultation does not necessarily create an ongoing client-lawyer relationship or authorize work. Rule 1.2 addresses the objectives and scope of representation and the allocation of authority between client and lawyer. A matter record should use the actual engagement, limitation, or non-engagement communication instead of assuming that a conversation covered every claim or task.

  • Client identity, lawyer and firm identity, opposing or related parties, event, claim, policy, court case, jurisdiction, and exact matter accepted
  • Work included, work excluded, investigation, preservation, insurance communications, filing, litigation, appeal, lien or benefit issues, property damage, and other related matters addressed separately
  • Effective date, conditions, signatures, fees, expenses, staffing, communication method, decision authority, settlement authority, termination, and file-return terms
  • Deadline, notice, preservation, payment, document, appointment, or communication responsibility assigned to the client, lawyer, another professional, or still unresolved

Turn matter-specific advice into a dated decision record

Matter-specific legal advice should be connected to the facts and sources reviewed, the question asked, assumptions, alternatives, risks, and the authorized relationship. It may change when new medical, insurance, witness, employment, court, or other records arrive. Record the advice accurately rather than converting a conditional discussion into a universal rule.

Rule 1.4 addresses communication with a client, including consultation about the means of accomplishing objectives, status information, reasonable requests, and explanations sufficient for informed decisions. A decision log can identify what was explained, which documents were reviewed, the client’s decision, authority given, action owner, date, and later change.

Use a verification checklist for important decisions

  • Is the source current, official when an official source exists, and applicable to the correct jurisdiction and date?
  • Does the source answer this question, or only a related general question?
  • Which facts, documents, policy language, court orders, deadlines, medical opinions, or communications were not available to the source?
  • Has a lawyer agreed to advise or represent this person on this matter and task, and is that status documented?
  • Who has decision authority, who must act, when, and what record will confirm completion or a changed instruction?

The related guide to what a preliminary injury consultation can and cannot determine explains how to prepare questions and documents for an initial discussion.

Rosensteel Fleishman Car Accident & Injury Lawyers provides general information about Charlotte personal-injury claims. A person should confirm the current relationship and authorized scope in writing before assuming that a lawyer is responsible for a task or deadline.

Sources