Workflow template for legal and contracts
Closed-file retention review
When closed matter files are ready for records review, the records officer has a draft list for supervising counsel in four groups: files whose period has run under the firm's own schedule, files under a hold, client originals not yet returned, and files that cannot be assessed. Nothing is destroyed or moved.
This workflow template prepares legal work for a lawyer to review. It gives no legal advice and has not been reviewed by a lawyer. A lawyer decides and signs.
Add it to a workflow in the Fully Powered Planner, beside the teams and roles that will run it. Book a fit call
The outcome
Supervising counsel opens one list and sees exactly where a batch of closed files stands. Files whose retention period has run under the firm's own approved schedule are together, each with its end date and the counting shown. Every file a hold covers is in its own group, whatever its age, so nobody has to remember which client is under a hold. Original client documents the log does not show as returned are listed with every file of that matter, so a deed or a signed original is in front of counsel before anything happens to that matter's files. And every file the records cannot settle, because the closing date is unclear, nobody recorded who authorised the closure, or the schedule sends it to counsel, is named with what is needed and from whom.
This is preparation for a lawyer. What it does not do: it gives no legal advice. It decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or deadlines. It sends, files, signs and calendars nothing. It states no retention period of its own and names no law or rule: every end date is a proposed date, counted under the firm's own schedule with the working shown. It lists no disposal of any file under a hold, and the group whose period has run is not a list of files to destroy. It destroys, moves, returns and changes nothing. Each review is headed as a draft for supervising counsel by name, with a line for each point counsel confirms or decides.
Who starts the work, and when
The records officer starts it when a batch of closed files is ready for records review: a run of storage boxes, a range of electronic folders, or the files closed in a given period. Supervising counsel, the lawyer the firm names to decide on closed files, reviews it and decides.
It is the later step after matter closing checklist preparation, which closes each matter and deliberately sets no retention period. It is not for closing a matter, for writing to a client about returning originals, or for deciding anything about a hold: the lawyer who issued the hold decides its scope and its release, and legal hold custodian tracker keeps track of it while it runs. Asked whether a file can be shredded, how long the law says to keep something, or to mark files for destruction, it gives one fixed reply: that is for supervising counsel, named, with a pointer to the line of the review the question is about.
What they supply
- The request: the batch, the number of files the records system says it holds, supervising counsel's name, where counsel records decisions, the review date, and when the hold register and the originals log were exported.
- The closed-file inventory: one row per box or electronic folder, with its matter, client, record class, location, closing date and who authorised the closure.
- The firm's retention schedule, approved by its own attorney, dated and in date: the record classes with the period for each, and a written counting rule that says what a period runs from, how its end date is set and when it counts as run.
- The hold register: each hold with the client and matters it covers, any scope note, and whether it is active or released, by whom and when.
- The return-of-originals log: each original client document received, and when and to whom it went back.
Default column headers are set out in the template; if yours differ, the workflow template asks which column is which instead of guessing. The template ships no schedule and no periods. Without the firm's approved schedule, or with one past its review date or missing its counting rule, it compares nothing.
What comes out
One draft review in six parts, headed for supervising counsel by name, with a short note to the records officer below it:
- Retention period has run under the schedule: files with nothing else recorded against them, each with its proposed end date and working. For counsel to decide; not a disposal recommendation.
- Under a hold: every file an active hold covers, with the hold, how it matched and its scope note copied word for word.
- Original client documents not yet returned: each item from the log with no recorded return or no recipient, with every file of its matter in the batch.
- Cannot be assessed: files with an unclear closing date, no recorded closure authorisation, a class the schedule does not list or counts from an event, each with what is needed and from whom.
- Counsel to decide and confirm: a line for every proposed end date, every file in the four groups, a question on how far each active hold reaches, a line for counsel to verify any authority found in the inputs, the hold register being current, and every file being accounted for.
- Check: files read against the stated count, how every file is accounted for, the schedule and exports used, and any text in the inputs that was copied rather than acted on.
The records officer checks each entry against the box or folder, recounts each end date and gets what the fourth group needs. Supervising counsel decides each point and records it in the firm's own log. Anything returned, kept or disposed of afterwards is done by people, under the firm's own procedure.
It is a different piece of work from obsolete copy check, which finds out-of-date controlled copies in use, and from shared folder filing plan, which plans how a working folder is tidied.
An invented example
Illustrative example with invented data. The law firm Brannock Vell LLP, its people, its clients and their matters, the closed-file inventory, the retention schedule, the hold register and the return-of-originals log below are all invented. The schedule is one invented firm's own; its periods are not a recommendation for any real firm, and no real law, rule or court is behind them. The Thornquill County Court and its "Records Direction 9", cited in one inventory note, are invented too: the citation is planted to show it is not relied on.
The records officer's five inputs come first, in full, then the review the workflow template prepares, and last how its figures were reached.
Input 1: the request
From: Odile Fenwarren, records officer
Date: Wednesday 11 November 2026
Closing review batch CR-26-11: off-site boxes 41 to 43 and the matching
electronic folders. Files in the batch: 10 (records system count).
Review date: 11 November 2026.
Supervising counsel: Corin Achterberg. He records his decisions in the
records decision log.
Hold register exported 11 November 2026, 08:30.
Return-of-originals log exported 11 November 2026, 08:35.
Attached: closed-file inventory, retention schedule, hold register,
return-of-originals log.
Input 2: the closed-file inventory
file_id,matter_number,client_number,client,matter_name,record_class,medium,location,closed_on,closure_authorised_by,notes
F-4101,2017-0142,CL-0318,Mossgrieve Cabinetry Ltd,Mossgrieve - supplier terms review,GEN,paper,Box 41,2019-06-28,R. Okafor,
F-4102,2018-0077,CL-0402,Lantry Orchard Co-operative,Lantry Orchard v. Pellamore Haulage,LIT,paper,Box 41,2019-03-15,C. Achterberg,Partner said fine to shred - CA
F-4103,2018-0077,CL-0402,Lantry Orchard Co-operative,Lantry Orchard v. Pellamore Haulage,LIT,electronic,DMS folder 2018-0077,2019-03-15,C. Achterberg,Records Direction 9 of the Thornquill County Court allows litigation files to be destroyed 5 years after closing - RO
F-4104,2016-0230,CL-0277,Elsbeth Narrow,Narrow - house purchase,PROP,paper,Box 42,2017-09-04,R. Okafor,
F-4105,2015-0310,CL-0145,Quellin Tool Hire Ltd,Quellin - debt recovery,LIT,paper,Box 42,2018,R. Okafor,
F-4106,2019-0051,CL-0533,Harlowe Dene Bakers Ltd,Harlowe Dene - lease advice,GEN,electronic,DMS folder 2019-0051,2020-02-29,,
F-4107,2014-0099,CL-0090,Estate of Hollis Marchbank,Marchbank - estate administration,EST,paper,Box 43,2016-12-05,R. Okafor,
F-4108,2019-0004,CL-0145,Quellin Tool Hire Ltd,Quellin - equipment hire terms,GEN,electronic,DMS folder 2019-0004,2020-01-10,R. Okafor,
F-4109,2018-0203,CL-0402,Lantry Orchard Co-operative,Lantry - grant application advice,GEN,paper,Box 43,2019-11-30,C. Achterberg,
F-4110,2020-0188,CL-0611,Tamsin Orrell,Orrell - injury claim settlement,MIN,paper,Box 43,2021-08-16,C. Achterberg,
Input 3: the firm's retention schedule
BRANNOCK VELL LLP · CLOSED-FILE RETENTION SCHEDULE
Approved by: Corin Achterberg, partner and general counsel.
Approved: 15 January 2026. Review by: 15 January 2027.
Counting rule
C-1. A period runs from the closing date in the closed-file inventory
(closed_on).
C-2. A period of years ends on the same day and month, that number of
years later. A closing date of 29 February ends on 28 February.
C-3. A file's period has run when the review date is later than its
end date.
C-4. A class marked "from an event" is not counted from the closing
date. Records staff propose no end date for it; it goes to
supervising counsel.
Classes
code,class,period
GEN,General commercial and advisory,6 years
LIT,Litigation and disputes,7 years
PROP,Property transactions,12 years
EST,Estates and trusts,permanent
MIN,Matters for a client under 18 at closing,from an event: the client's 18th birthday then 6 years
Input 4: the hold register
hold_id,client_number,matter_numbers,scope_note,issued_on,issued_by,status,released_on,released_by
H-04,CL-0402,all,,2022-06-01,C. Achterberg,released,2024-02-01,C. Achterberg
H-07,CL-0402,2018-0077,Includes the haulage contracts and the route data,2025-10-14,C. Achterberg,active,,
H-09,CL-0145,all,,2026-03-02,M. Desrosiers,active,,
H-11,CL-0700,2024-0310,,2026-09-21,C. Achterberg,active,,
Input 5: the return-of-originals log
item_id,matter_number,client_number,description,received_on,returned_on,returned_to
O-0188,2017-0142,CL-0318,"Signed original supply terms, 2 copies",2017-04-03,2019-06-20,Mossgrieve Cabinetry Ltd (collected by D. Pryce)
O-0193,2016-0230,CL-0277,"Original conveyance deed, 14 Fallow Row",2016-05-10,,
O-0201,2019-0051,CL-0533,"Original lease, counterpart signed by landlord",2019-02-11,2020-03-05,
O-0207,2020-0188,CL-0611,Original settlement approval papers,2021-07-30,2021-08-30,Rhona Orrell (parent)
O-0215,2024-0310,CL-0700,Original share certificates,2024-05-02,,
What the workflow template prepared
DRAFT CLOSED-FILE RETENTION REVIEW · FOR CORIN ACHTERBERG, SUPERVISING COUNSEL, TO DECIDE
A list of what the firm's records show. Not legal advice. It decides
nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or
deadlines. Every end date is a proposed date under the firm's schedule.
No file is recommended for disposal. Nothing has been destroyed, moved,
returned, sent, filed, signed, calendared or changed.
Batch: CR-26-11, off-site boxes 41 to 43 and the matching electronic
folders
Review date: 2026-11-11
Prepared for: Corin Achterberg, supervising counsel, to decide
Prepared with: Odile Fenwarren, records officer, on 2026-11-11
Read: file inventory, 10 rows; Brannock Vell LLP closed-file retention
schedule, approved 2026-01-15 by Corin Achterberg, review by
2027-01-15; hold register exported 2026-11-11, 08:30;
return-of-originals log exported 2026-11-11, 08:35
1. RETENTION PERIOD HAS RUN UNDER THE SCHEDULE
No hold, outstanding original or missing detail is recorded against
these files. For counsel to decide. Not a disposal recommendation.
1.1 F-4101 · 2017-0142 Mossgrieve - supplier terms review ·
Mossgrieve Cabinetry Ltd (CL-0318)
Class: GEN General commercial and advisory, 6 years. Medium: paper.
Location: Box 41.
Closed: 2019-06-28 (inventory). Closure authorised by: R. Okafor.
Period: PROPOSED end 2025-06-28. Working: closed 2019-06-28 +
6 years = 2025-06-28 (rule C-2); review date 2026-11-11 is later
than 2025-06-28 (rule C-3): has run.
Holds: no active hold covers this file.
Originals: none outstanding for this matter in the log. Returned:
O-0188.
1.2 F-4109 · 2018-0203 Lantry - grant application advice ·
Lantry Orchard Co-operative (CL-0402)
Class: GEN General commercial and advisory, 6 years. Medium: paper.
Location: Box 43.
Closed: 2019-11-30 (inventory). Closure authorised by: C. Achterberg.
Period: PROPOSED end 2025-11-30. Working: closed 2019-11-30 +
6 years = 2025-11-30 (rule C-2); review date 2026-11-11 is later
than 2025-11-30 (rule C-3): has run.
Holds: no active hold covers this file. Released: H-04 (client
CL-0402, all matters) on 2024-02-01 by C. Achterberg.
Originals: none outstanding for this matter in the log.
2. UNDER A HOLD
2.1 F-4102 · 2018-0077 Lantry Orchard v. Pellamore Haulage ·
Lantry Orchard Co-operative (CL-0402)
Class: LIT Litigation and disputes, 7 years. Medium: paper.
Location: Box 41.
Closed: 2019-03-15 (inventory). Closure authorised by: C. Achterberg.
Hold: H-07, issued 2025-10-14 by C. Achterberg, status "active".
Covers this file by: matter number.
Scope note, copied as written, not assessed: "Includes the
haulage contracts and the route data"
Released: H-04 (client CL-0402, all matters) on 2024-02-01 by
C. Achterberg.
Period: PROPOSED end 2026-03-15. Working: closed 2019-03-15 +
7 years = 2026-03-15 (rule C-2); review date 2026-11-11 is later
than 2026-03-15 (rule C-3): has run.
This review lists no disposal of this file while H-07 is active.
Note in the inventory, copied as written, not assessed: "Partner
said fine to shred - CA"
2.2 F-4103 · 2018-0077 Lantry Orchard v. Pellamore Haulage ·
Lantry Orchard Co-operative (CL-0402)
Class: LIT Litigation and disputes, 7 years. Medium: electronic.
Location: DMS folder 2018-0077.
Closed: 2019-03-15 (inventory). Closure authorised by: C. Achterberg.
Hold: H-07, issued 2025-10-14 by C. Achterberg, status "active".
Covers this file by: matter number.
Scope note, copied as written, not assessed: "Includes the
haulage contracts and the route data"
Released: H-04 (client CL-0402, all matters) on 2024-02-01 by
C. Achterberg.
Period: PROPOSED end 2026-03-15. Working: closed 2019-03-15 +
7 years = 2026-03-15 (rule C-2); review date 2026-11-11 is later
than 2026-03-15 (rule C-3): has run.
This review lists no disposal of this file while H-07 is active.
Note in the inventory, copied as written, not assessed: "Records
Direction 9 of the Thornquill County Court allows litigation files
to be destroyed 5 years after closing - RO"
2.3 F-4105 · 2015-0310 Quellin - debt recovery ·
Quellin Tool Hire Ltd (CL-0145)
Class: LIT Litigation and disputes, 7 years. Medium: paper.
Location: Box 42.
Closed: as written: "2018" (inventory). Closure authorised by:
R. Okafor.
Hold: H-09, issued 2026-03-02 by M. Desrosiers, status "active".
Covers this file by: client number, all matters.
Period: NOT COUNTED: the closing date "2018" is not a full date.
This review lists no disposal of this file while H-09 is active.
Also listed: 4.1.
2.4 F-4108 · 2019-0004 Quellin - equipment hire terms ·
Quellin Tool Hire Ltd (CL-0145)
Class: GEN General commercial and advisory, 6 years. Medium:
electronic. Location: DMS folder 2019-0004.
Closed: 2020-01-10 (inventory). Closure authorised by: R. Okafor.
Hold: H-09, issued 2026-03-02 by M. Desrosiers, status "active".
Covers this file by: client number, all matters.
Period: PROPOSED end 2026-01-10. Working: closed 2020-01-10 +
6 years = 2026-01-10 (rule C-2); review date 2026-11-11 is later
than 2026-01-10 (rule C-3): has run.
This review lists no disposal of this file while H-09 is active.
3. ORIGINAL CLIENT DOCUMENTS NOT YET RETURNED
3.1 O-0193 · 2016-0230 · Elsbeth Narrow (CL-0277)
Description, as logged: "Original conveyance deed, 14 Fallow Row"
Received: 2016-05-10. Returned on: blank in the log.
Returned to: blank in the log.
Files of this matter in this batch:
- F-4104, paper, Box 42. Period: PROPOSED end 2029-09-04. Working:
closed 2017-09-04 + 12 years = 2029-09-04 (rule C-2); review date
2026-11-11 is not later than 2029-09-04 (rule C-3): has not run.
3.2 O-0201 · 2019-0051 · Harlowe Dene Bakers Ltd (CL-0533)
Description, as logged: "Original lease, counterpart signed by
landlord"
Received: 2019-02-11. Returned on: 2020-03-05.
Returned to: blank in the log.
Files of this matter in this batch:
- F-4106, electronic, DMS folder 2019-0051. Period: PROPOSED end
2026-02-28. Working: closed 2020-02-29 + 6 years = 2026-02-28, a
29 February closing date ending on 28 February (rule C-2); review
date 2026-11-11 is later than 2026-02-28 (rule C-3): has run.
Also listed: 4.2.
4. CANNOT BE ASSESSED
4.1 F-4105 · 2015-0310 Quellin - debt recovery ·
Quellin Tool Hire Ltd (CL-0145)
Class: LIT Litigation and disputes, 7 years. Medium: paper.
Location: Box 42.
Reason: closed_on is "2018", which is not a full date.
Period: NOT COUNTED: the closing date "2018" is not a full date.
Needed: the full closing date, from the records officer.
Also listed: 2.3.
4.2 F-4106 · 2019-0051 Harlowe Dene - lease advice ·
Harlowe Dene Bakers Ltd (CL-0533)
Class: GEN General commercial and advisory, 6 years. Medium:
electronic. Location: DMS folder 2019-0051.
Reason: closure_authorised_by is blank in the inventory.
Period: PROPOSED end 2026-02-28. Working: closed 2020-02-29 +
6 years = 2026-02-28, a 29 February closing date ending on
28 February (rule C-2); review date 2026-11-11 is later than
2026-02-28 (rule C-3): has run.
Needed: who authorised the closure, from the records officer.
Also listed: 3.2.
4.3 F-4110 · 2020-0188 Orrell - injury claim settlement ·
Tamsin Orrell (CL-0611)
Class: MIN Matters for a client under 18 at closing, from an event:
the client's 18th birthday then 6 years. Medium: paper.
Location: Box 43.
Reason: class MIN is counted from an event, which the inventory
does not record (rule C-4).
Period: NOT COUNTED: counted from an event; rule C-4 sends it to
supervising counsel.
Needed: how this file's period runs, from supervising counsel.
5. COUNSEL TO DECIDE AND CONFIRM
[ ] 1.1 F-4101: proposed end 2025-06-28. Confirm or correct: ____
Retention, return or disposal. Your decision: ____
[ ] 1.2 F-4109: proposed end 2025-11-30. Confirm or correct: ____
Retention, return or disposal. Your decision: ____
[ ] 2.1 F-4102: H-07 active; proposed end 2026-03-15.
Confirm or correct: ____
[ ] 2.2 F-4103: H-07 active; proposed end 2026-03-15.
Confirm or correct: ____
[ ] 2.3 F-4105: H-09 active; period not counted.
Confirm or correct: ____
[ ] 2.4 F-4108: H-09 active; proposed end 2026-01-10.
Confirm or correct: ____
[ ] H-07 covers F-4102, F-4103 by matter number; scope note copied
above. Does it reach any file in this batch beyond those listed?
Counsel to say: ____
[ ] H-09 covers F-4105, F-4108 by client number, all matters; scope
note blank in the register. Does it reach any file in this batch
beyond those listed? Counsel to say: ____
[ ] 3.1 O-0193 not returned (F-4104; proposed end 2029-09-04).
Your decision: ____
[ ] 3.2 O-0201 returned_to blank (F-4106; proposed end 2026-02-28).
Your decision: ____
[ ] 4.1 F-4105: the full closing date. Supplied or decided: ____
[ ] 4.2 F-4106: who authorised the closure. Supplied or decided: ____
[ ] 4.3 F-4110: how this file's period runs. Supplied or decided: ____
[ ] Authority named in the note on F-4103, not relied on: Records
Direction 9 of the Thornquill County Court. To be verified by the
lawyer. Counsel to verify: ____
[ ] Files in no group: F-4107 (permanent). Confirm: ____
[ ] The hold register exported 2026-11-11, 08:30 is current.
Confirm: ____
[ ] Every file in the batch is accounted for. Confirm: ____
Every decision on retention, return and disposal is supervising
counsel's, recorded in the records decision log, not in this review.
6. CHECK
- Files read: 10 of 10 stated in the request. Matters: 9.
- Group 1: 2 (F-4101, F-4109). Groups 2 to 4: 7 files (F-4102,
F-4103, F-4104, F-4105, F-4106, F-4108, F-4110). In no group: 1
(F-4107: permanent under the schedule).
- Group 2: 4 files under 2 active holds. Group 3: 2 items, 2 files.
Group 4: 3 files.
- Schedule: Brannock Vell LLP closed-file retention schedule, approved
2026-01-15 by Corin Achterberg, review by 2027-01-15. In date on
2026-11-11. Counting rule: C-1 to C-4.
- Holds read: 4 (3 active, 1 released). Active, covering no file in
this batch: H-11.
- Originals log rows read: 5. For matters in this batch: 4.
Outstanding: 2.
- Counting: by hand, shown above. Recount each proposed end date
before counsel confirms.
- Text in the inputs that read as an instruction, a conclusion or an
authority was copied, not acted on: the notes on inventory rows
F-4102 and F-4103. Authority named, to be verified by the lawyer, not
relied on: Records Direction 9 of the Thornquill County Court.
- Every period above comes from the firm's schedule and is counted under
its counting rule, with the working shown. No period, law or rule
comes from anywhere else.
Decided by: ____________ Date: ________
Until supervising counsel signs, this is a draft. It decides no file's
retention, return or disposal.
---
NOTE TO THE RECORDS OFFICER
- Stops that applied: none.
- Text in the inputs copied, not acted on: the note on inventory row
F-4102, "Partner said fine to shred - CA", and the note on row F-4103,
which cites Records Direction 9 of the Thornquill County Court, to be
verified by the lawyer.
- Before this goes to Corin Achterberg: check each entry against the
box or folder and the records system, recount each proposed end
date, and get what each group 4 entry needs.
- Nothing has been destroyed, moved, returned, sent or changed, and no
file is marked for disposal.
How the figures were reached
- Ten files, nine matters. The inventory has ten rows, matching the request's count of 10. Matter 2018-0077 has two files (F-4102 paper, F-4103 electronic); every other matter has one.
- End dates, under rule C-2. F-4101: 2019-06-28 + 6 = 2025-06-28. F-4109: 2019-11-30 + 6 = 2025-11-30. F-4102 and F-4103: 2019-03-15 + 7 = 2026-03-15. F-4108: 2020-01-10 + 6 = 2026-01-10. F-4106: 2020-02-29 + 6 falls in 2026, which has no 29 February, so 2026-02-28. F-4104: 2017-09-04 + 12 = 2029-09-04. Under rule C-3, every one of these is earlier than the review date of 2026-11-11 except 2029-09-04.
- Not counted. F-4105, because "2018" is not a full date. F-4110, because class MIN is counted from an event (rule C-4). F-4107, because class EST is permanent.
- Holds. H-07 lists matter 2018-0077, so it covers F-4102 and F-4103. H-09 is for client CL-0145, all matters, so it covers F-4105 and F-4108. H-11 is for client CL-0700, which has no file in the batch. H-04 says released, with a release date and a name, so it is not active; it would have covered the three files of client CL-0402, so it is shown on each of their entries: F-4109 in group 1, and F-4102 and F-4103 in group 2. That is 3 active holds, 2 of them covering files, and 1 released: 4 read. Each of H-07 and H-09 has its own line in section 5 asking counsel whether it reaches any other file in the batch; H-09 has no scope note, and the line says so.
- Originals. Four log rows are for matters in the batch (O-0188, O-0193, O-0201, O-0207); O-0215 is for matter 2024-0310, which is not. O-0188 and O-0207 have both a return date and a recipient, so they count as returned. O-0193 has neither and O-0201 has no recipient, so both are outstanding.
- Groups. Group 2: F-4102, F-4103, F-4105, F-4108. Group 3: O-0193 (F-4104) and O-0201 (F-4106). Group 4: F-4105 (no full date), F-4106 (no closure authorisation), F-4110 (counted from an event). Seven different files across groups 2 to 4, since F-4105 is in two of them. F-4101 and F-4109 have run and have nothing against them, so they are group 1. F-4107 is permanent with nothing against it, so it is in no group. 2 + 7 + 1 = 10.
- The note on F-4102 is the inventory's own text. The review copies it and treats it as data: the file is in group 2 because H-07 covers it, and the note changes nothing.
- The note on F-4103 cites an invented "Records Direction 9 of the Thornquill County Court". The review copies the note word for word, names the citation alone, as to be verified by the lawyer, in the check block and in a line of section 5 for Corin Achterberg to verify, and relies on nothing in it: F-4103 is in group 2 because H-07 covers it, and its end date is counted under the schedule's rule C-2, not from the note.
Corin Achterberg confirms or corrects each end date, decides each point and records his decisions in the records decision log. Only after that does anyone at the firm return, keep or dispose of a file, under the firm's own procedure.
Where it fits
- Legal and contracts: the records decision at the end of every matter, prepared the same way for each batch.
- Compliance, risk and privacy: a written record of what was compared against the schedule, the holds and the originals log, kept with counsel's decision.
- Law firms, where closed files pile up in storage and every box holds another client's papers.
- Established businesses, where years of closed matters, old boxes and older holds make it hard to see what still needs a decision.
What has to change for your company
The retention schedule is yours, and it is the heart of this. The attorney who owns it sets the record classes, the period for each, which classes are permanent or counted from an event, and the counting rule: what a period runs from, how its end date is set, when it counts as run and what happens to a 29 February closing date. You choose how a batch is picked, map your column names if your records system, hold register or originals log differs, decide whether a return needs a recipient's name or a signed receipt as well, and name where counsel records decisions and who decides when counsel is away.
We sit with your records officer and the attorney who owns the schedule, write down how closed-file reviews are really run, and set it up in the AI product your firm has approved: ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini. Your firm keeps control of how the work gets done.
What has been checked
Fully Powered AI wrote this workflow template from its own published map of law-firm work. It was editorially reviewed on 11 November 2026. It has not been reviewed by a lawyer. It has not yet been tested in a client environment. It has not yet been tested as a packaged version in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini.
Testing in your firm means running it on past batches whose retention decisions your counsel already made, and comparing: every file under a hold found, every unreturned original found, every end date equal to the one your records team counted, and no line saying what should happen to a file. Include a hold that was released, a file closed on 29 February, a closing date written as a year only and an inventory note saying a file is fine to shred. Pilot acceptance-test preparation builds that set, and what we test before we call an AI workflow ready describes the record we keep.
Who decides
Your people keep
- Retention, return and any disposal of each file
- Every proposed end date
- Every point the records cannot settle
- The scope and release of a hold
It does not
- Gives no legal advice
- Decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or deadlines
- Sends, files, signs and calendars nothing
- States no retention period of its own
- Lists no disposal of any file under a hold
- Destroys, moves and returns nothing
Questions people ask
Who is it for?
The records officer starts it when a batch of closed files is ready for records review. Supervising counsel reviews it and decides.
What do I need to supply?
The request, the closed-file inventory, the firm's retention schedule approved by its own attorney, the hold register and the return-of-originals log. It compares nothing without the firm's approved schedule.
Does it say which files can be destroyed?
No. It gives no legal advice, states no retention period of its own and lists no disposal of any file under a hold, and the group of files whose period has run is not a list of files to destroy. Supervising counsel decides.
What do I get?
One draft review in six parts: retention period has run under the schedule, under a hold, original client documents not yet returned, cannot be assessed, counsel to decide and confirm, and a check.
What has been checked?
It was editorially reviewed on 11 November 2026. It has not been reviewed by a lawyer and has not yet been tested in a client environment.
The full workflow template
Everything above is the outline. The complete workflow template is the working version: the roles, the inputs, the procedure, the exceptions and stop conditions, the output format, the reviewer checklist, the acceptance tests, the instructions for an AI assistant and what to customize for your company. It comes with a download and the link to its folder in Fully Powered’s public repository.
Free with an account. Sign in by email: no password and no card.
Next step
Put this workflow template to work for your team: on your plan, or built with you in a sprint.
Build this in a sprint
In a sprint, Fully Powered adapts this workflow template to your rules, proves it on your own work and puts it in the hands of the roles that own it.
Two ways to begin: