Workflow template for legal and contracts
Weekly status requests to outside counsel
Every Monday, in-house counsel has a draft status request for each outside firm that owes one: what has happened since the last update, the dates on record to confirm, decisions pending and spend against budget, plus the matters skipped and why. Counsel edits and sends each one.
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.
Listed under
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
Counsel's Monday starts with the check-ins already drafted, not with a blank email to each firm in turn. The drafts are waiting: one per matter that is due a check-in, each asking the firm the right questions in counsel's own house style, with the company's facts already in place. Matters the rules do not select are skipped, and the summary gives the rule for each, for counsel to confirm, so no matter drops out of sight unlisted.
The drafts ask; they never instruct. Each item ends in a question, and no draft tells a firm how to run its matter, offers a view of the case or carries anything the company keeps internal. This workflow template gives no legal advice. It decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or deadlines: a date appears only as the company has it on record, for the firm to confirm, and no date is counted. It names no case, statute or rule of its own and never calls one current or valid; one reaches a draft only when it has been written into the questions for the firm on that matter, and it is then marked to be verified by the lawyer. It sends, files, signs and calendars nothing, puts nothing into a mailbox and changes no record. Every draft and the run summary are headed as drafts for the reviewing counsel, saying that they are not legal advice, decide nothing and that nothing has been sent, filed, signed or calendared, with a line for each point counsel confirms before a draft goes.
Who starts the work, and when
The legal operations manager or matter coordinator runs it each week, usually Monday morning, from the company's matter list. The reviewing counsel, the company's in-house lawyer who owns the relationship with the outside firms, reads every draft, edits it, and decides whether and when it is sent from their own mailbox.
It suits a company with several matters at outside firms at once: commercial disputes, regulatory inquiries, customs or property work. It is not for a firm's own sweep of its open matters, a firm's budget report to its client, or reporting a matter's status to the board.
What they supply
- The matter list, exported from the company's matter system or a spreadsheet, with fixed column headers: each matter's status, the firm and lead lawyer, the date of the firm's last update, the next date on record, the authorised budget and the fees billed so far. If a header does not match, the run stops and asks which column is which.
- The matter notes: for each open matter, the events since the firm's last update, the dates on record, the decisions pending and counsel's own questions for the firm. A section for internal notes is never copied into an email.
- The house settings, approved once by counsel: who reviews and sends, the subject line, greeting and sign-off, and the thresholds for when a request is due and when spend is flagged.
- Today's date.
What comes out
- One draft request per matter that is due one. Each asks what has happened since the firm's last update, lists the dates the company has on record for the firm to confirm, asks where each pending decision stands, sets billed fees against the authorised budget and asks about work not yet billed, then adds counsel's own questions. Under it: the lines counsel confirms before sending, and the working behind every number.
- A run summary for counsel: the rules used, every matter drafted with the reason, every matter skipped with the reason, and what needs counsel's attention, such as a matter over budget, an open matter with no firm on record or a missing email address. Every row of the matter list is accounted for.
Counsel edits each draft, answers its confirm lines and sends it. Recording the firms' replies stays with the people who keep the matter file.
An invented example
Illustrative example with invented data. Company K, its people, Firms A, B and C and their lawyers, the other parties, the Superior Court of Eastmere, Agency W, the matters, the dates and the amounts below are all invented. Company K is an invented maker of industrial valves with one in-house lawyer, Mara Ilsley, and a legal operations manager, Devon Achterberg, who runs the work each Monday.
Devon's four inputs come first, in full, then everything the workflow template prepared.
Input 1: today's date
Monday 16 November 2026
Input 2: the house settings, approved by Mara Ilsley
Reviewing counsel: Mara Ilsley, Senior Counsel
Prepared by: Devon Achterberg, Legal Operations Manager
Sender: Mara Ilsley <mara.ilsley@company-k.example>
Subject: [matter_id] [matter_name]: status request
Greeting: [first name],
Opening line: Ahead of our Monday review, a few questions on [matter_name].
Sign-off: Thank you,
Mara Ilsley
Senior Counsel, Company K
Top line: Confidential: Company K legal department
Stale after: 10 days
Upcoming within: 21 days
Spend flag at: 80%
Currency: US dollars ($)
Include this week: none
Leave out this week: none
Input 3: the matter list, exported from Company K's matter system
matter_id,matter_name,status,priority,firm,lead_lawyer,lead_email,last_update,next_date,next_event,budget_authorised,billed_to_date,billed_through
M-201,Company K v. Supplier C,open,high,Firm A LLP,Hal Brennick,hal.brennick@firm-a.example,2026-10-30,2026-12-08,Mediation session,120000,86400,2026-10-31
M-202,Distributor D v. Company K,open,normal,Firm B LLP,Selin Okafor,selin.okafor@firm-b.example,2026-11-12,2026-12-01,Case management conference,60000,61250,2026-10-31
M-203,Agency W inquiry,open,normal,Firm C LLP,Tomas Reyna,tomas.reyna@firm-c.example,2026-11-10,2027-01-15,Agency's requested response date,40000,12300,2026-10-31
M-204,Warehouse lease with Landlord L,on hold,normal,Firm A LLP,Hal Brennick,hal.brennick@firm-a.example,2026-09-14,,,15000,3100,2026-09-30
M-205,Customer M incident claim,open,high,,,,,,,,,
M-206,Customs classification review,open,normal,Firm C LLP,Ada Morrow,,2026-10-20,,,25000,4800,2026-10-31
Input 4: the matter notes
Matter: M-201
Last update from the firm: 2026-10-30 (call with Hal Brennick)
Events since:
- 2026-10-28 Firm A sent the draft mediation statement for comment
- 2026-11-04 Supplier C's counsel wrote proposing a second mediation day
- 2026-11-09 Firm A's October invoice received
Dates on record:
- 2026-12-08 Mediation session (Firm A's email of 2026-10-30)
Decisions pending:
- Whether a second mediation day is needed (Firm A to advise)
- Who from Company K attends the mediation
Open questions for the firm:
- Has Supplier C produced the batch test records it promised?
Internal only:
- Finance wants the matter closed before year end.
Matter: M-202
Last update from the firm: 2026-11-12 (email from Selin Okafor)
Events since:
- 2026-11-13 Company K's sales team sent Firm B the distributor file (12 documents)
Dates on record:
- 2026-12-01 Case management conference (notice from the Superior Court of Eastmere, forwarded by Firm B)
Decisions pending:
- Who from Company K attends the case management conference
Open questions for the firm:
- none
Internal only:
- The CFO wants to discuss whether Firm B stays on this matter after the conference.
Matter: M-206
Last update from the firm: 2026-10-20 (report from Ada Morrow)
Events since:
- none
Dates on record:
- none
Decisions pending:
- none
Open questions for the firm:
- Has the customs authority acknowledged the classification request?
Internal only:
- none
What the workflow template prepared
DRAFTS FOR Mara Ilsley · NOTE TO THE COORDINATOR
Not legal advice. Decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity,
privilege, conflicts or deadlines. Nothing has been sent, filed, signed,
calendared or recorded.
3 drafts, 3 skipped. 3 items for counsel's attention, listed in the
run summary.
Event lines left out as dated on or before the last update: M-201, 1.
Still to do: read each draft against the matter file, then pass the set to
Mara Ilsley, who edits, answers the confirm lines and sends.
I have sent nothing, saved nothing to a mailbox and recorded nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT STATUS REQUEST · FOR Mara Ilsley TO REVIEW AND SEND
Not legal advice. Decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity,
privilege, conflicts or deadlines. Nothing has been sent, filed, signed,
calendared or recorded.
Matter: M-201, Company K v. Supplier C
Why drafted: last update 17 days ago
To: Hal Brennick, Firm A LLP <hal.brennick@firm-a.example>
From: Mara Ilsley <mara.ilsley@company-k.example>
Subject: M-201 Company K v. Supplier C: status request
Confidential: Company K legal department
Hal,
Ahead of our Monday review, a few questions on Company K v. Supplier C.
1. Since your last update on 2026-10-30
Our notes show:
- 2026-11-04: Supplier C's counsel wrote proposing a second mediation day
- 2026-11-09: Firm A's October invoice received
What has happened on the matter since then, and is anything waiting on
either side?
2. Dates we have on record
- 2026-12-08: Mediation session
Could you confirm these, and tell us of any date we should have that is
not here?
3. Decisions pending
- Whether a second mediation day is needed (Firm A to advise)
- Who from Company K attends the mediation
Where does each of these stand, and what do you need from us?
4. Spend against the authorised budget
Authorised: $120,000. Billed to date: $86,400, invoices through
2026-10-31. Remaining: $33,600 (72% of the budget billed).
What work has been done that is not yet billed, and do you expect the
matter to need more than the authorised budget?
5. Our open questions
- Has Supplier C produced the batch test records it promised?
Thank you,
Mara Ilsley
Senior Counsel, Company K
COUNSEL TO CONFIRM BEFORE SENDING
[ ] Recipient and email address are right. Confirm: ____
[ ] The events listed match the matter file. Confirm: ____
[ ] The dates are as the company has them on record.
None was counted here. Confirm: ____
[ ] The decisions listed are the ones to raise with the firm. Confirm: ____
[ ] The spend figures match the firm's invoices. Confirm: ____
[ ] The email holds no view of the case, no figure for
settlement and nothing you keep internal. Confirm: ____
Working: today 2026-11-16. Last update 2026-10-30, 17 days ago. Next date on
record 2026-12-08, 22 days away. Spend 120,000 − 86,400 = 33,600;
86,400 ÷ 120,000 = 72%.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT STATUS REQUEST · FOR Mara Ilsley TO REVIEW AND SEND
Not legal advice. Decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity,
privilege, conflicts or deadlines. Nothing has been sent, filed, signed,
calendared or recorded.
Matter: M-202, Distributor D v. Company K
Why drafted: date on record in 15 days
To: Selin Okafor, Firm B LLP <selin.okafor@firm-b.example>
From: Mara Ilsley <mara.ilsley@company-k.example>
Subject: M-202 Distributor D v. Company K: status request
Confidential: Company K legal department
Selin,
Ahead of our Monday review, a few questions on Distributor D v. Company K.
1. Since your last update on 2026-11-12
Our notes show:
- 2026-11-13: Company K's sales team sent Firm B the distributor file
(12 documents)
What has happened on the matter since then, and is anything waiting on
either side?
2. Dates we have on record
- 2026-12-01: Case management conference
Could you confirm these, and tell us of any date we should have that is
not here?
3. Decisions pending
- Who from Company K attends the case management conference
Where does each of these stand, and what do you need from us?
4. Spend against the authorised budget
Authorised: $60,000. Billed to date: $61,250, invoices through
2026-10-31. Over by: $1,250 (102% of the budget billed).
What work has been done that is not yet billed, and what further fees
do you expect the matter to need?
Thank you,
Mara Ilsley
Senior Counsel, Company K
COUNSEL TO CONFIRM BEFORE SENDING
[ ] Recipient and email address are right. Confirm: ____
[ ] The events listed match the matter file. Confirm: ____
[ ] The dates are as the company has them on record.
None was counted here. Confirm: ____
[ ] The decisions listed are the ones to raise with the firm. Confirm: ____
[ ] The spend figures match the firm's invoices. Confirm: ____
[ ] The email holds no view of the case, no figure for
settlement and nothing you keep internal. Confirm: ____
[ ] Spend over the authorised budget: billed $61,250 against
$60,000, over by $1,250 (102%). Confirm: ____
Working: today 2026-11-16. Last update 2026-11-12, 4 days ago. Next date on
record 2026-12-01, 15 days away. Spend 61,250 − 60,000 = over by 1,250;
61,250 ÷ 60,000 = 102%.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT STATUS REQUEST · FOR Mara Ilsley TO REVIEW AND SEND
Not legal advice. Decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity,
privilege, conflicts or deadlines. Nothing has been sent, filed, signed,
calendared or recorded.
Matter: M-206, Customs classification review
Why drafted: last update 27 days ago
To: Ada Morrow, Firm C LLP <email not on record>
From: Mara Ilsley <mara.ilsley@company-k.example>
Subject: M-206 Customs classification review: status request
Confidential: Company K legal department
Ada,
Ahead of our Monday review, a few questions on Customs classification review.
1. Since your last update on 2026-10-20
Our notes show:
- None in our notes.
What has happened on the matter since then, and is anything waiting on
either side?
2. Dates we have on record
- None on record.
Could you tell us of any date we should have on record?
3. Spend against the authorised budget
Authorised: $25,000. Billed to date: $4,800, invoices through
2026-10-31. Remaining: $20,200 (19% of the budget billed).
What work has been done that is not yet billed, and do you expect the
matter to need more than the authorised budget?
4. Our open questions
- Has the customs authority acknowledged the classification request?
Thank you,
Mara Ilsley
Senior Counsel, Company K
COUNSEL TO CONFIRM BEFORE SENDING
[ ] Recipient and email address are right. Confirm: ____
[ ] The events listed match the matter file. Confirm: ____
[ ] The dates are as the company has them on record.
None was counted here. Confirm: ____
[ ] The decisions listed are the ones to raise with the firm. Confirm: ____
[ ] The spend figures match the firm's invoices. Confirm: ____
[ ] The email holds no view of the case, no figure for
settlement and nothing you keep internal. Confirm: ____
[ ] No email address on record for Ada Morrow. Confirm: ____
Working: today 2026-11-16. Last update 2026-10-20, 27 days ago. Next date on
record none. Spend 25,000 − 4,800 = 20,200; 4,800 ÷ 25,000 = 19%.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT RUN SUMMARY · FOR Mara Ilsley
Weekly status requests to outside counsel, run of 2026-11-16
Not legal advice. Decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity,
privilege, conflicts or deadlines. Nothing has been sent, filed, signed,
calendared or recorded.
Prepared by: Devon Achterberg, Legal Operations Manager
RULES USED
- Requests due when the firm's last update is older than 10 days, or a
date on record falls within 21 days or has passed.
- Spend flagged at 80% of the authorised budget or over it.
- Counsel's changes this week: none.
DRAFTED (3)
- M-201, Company K v. Supplier C · Firm A LLP, Hal Brennick · last update
17 days ago
- M-202, Distributor D v. Company K · Firm B LLP, Selin Okafor · date on
record in 15 days
- M-206, Customs classification review · Firm C LLP, Ada Morrow · last
update 27 days ago
SKIPPED (3)
- M-203, Agency W inquiry · update 6 days ago; next date on record
2027-01-15
- M-204, Warehouse lease with Landlord L · on hold
- M-205, Customer M incident claim · no outside firm or lead lawyer on
record
NEEDS COUNSEL'S ATTENTION (3)
- M-202 · spend over the authorised budget: billed $61,250 against
$60,000, over by $1,250 (102%).
- M-205 · HIGH PRIORITY · open, with no outside firm or lead lawyer on
record.
- M-206 · no email address on record for Ada Morrow.
COUNSEL TO CONFIRM
[ ] Each skipped matter can wait until the next run. Confirm: ____
[ ] Each item under NEEDS COUNSEL'S ATTENTION is dealt with. Confirm: ____
[ ] Each draft was reviewed and its confirm lines answered
before it was sent. Confirm: ____
CHECK
- Rows read: 6. Drafted 3 + skipped 3 = 6.
- Columns: default headers.
- Notes blocks used: 3.
- Event lines left out as dated on or before the last update: 1.
- Every fact in the drafts is in the matter list or the notes. No date was
counted or added, no case, statute or rule was added, and nothing has
been sent, saved to a mailbox or recorded.
What to notice: M-201's line from 28 October was left out because it predates Firm A's last update, and the note says so. Neither "Internal only" line reached a draft. M-202 has no open questions, so its fifth item is left out; M-206 has no decisions pending, so its items are renumbered, and with no date on record its second item asks the firm for any date rather than to confirm one. M-202's fees are already over the authorised budget, so its spend question asks what further fees the firm expects rather than whether it expects to go over. The court and the source of each date stay in Devon's notes and out of the emails. The two matters with something wrong on the company's own side, a high-priority claim with no firm and a missing email address, go to Mara rather than into an email. Mara edits each draft, answers its confirm lines and sends it herself. The trial record published with this example shows the same week prepared for a company with no in-house lawyer, where the person who sends the drafts checks facts only and every point for a lawyer names the lawyer it goes to.
Where it fits
- Legal and contracts: the in-house legal team that manages outside firms and answers to the business for their progress and their cost.
- Manufacturing, where supplier and distributor disputes, customs questions and product claims run at several firms at once.
- Software and technology, where a small legal team oversees outside firms on commercial, regulatory and intellectual property matters.
- Insurance, where in-house counsel tracks many matters at panel firms against agreed budgets.
- Established businesses, with a standing portfolio of matters and firms to keep current.
- Growth & scaling, when the matter count grows faster than the legal team.
It sits beside matter budget and status summary, the report a firm prepares on its own side, and weekly open-matter check, the sweep a law firm runs over its own open matters.
What has to change for your company
Counsel writes the house settings once: the greeting, sign-off and line at the top of each email, how many days of silence make a request due, how far ahead a date on record triggers one, and the share of the budget at which spend is flagged. Counsel can replace the standard questions with their own wording, as long as each stays a question. Map your matter system's column names to the template's once, decide who keeps the notes and what goes in the internal section, and name who records the firms' replies.
A company with no in-house lawyer can use it too. The drafts stay requests addressed to each matter's outside lead lawyer, who is the lawyer deciding on that matter. The person who manages the outside firms checks only the facts in each draft and sends it; they are never asked to judge whether a matter can wait or what a date or a reply means. The run summary names, for every point that needs attention and every skipped matter that is not closed, the lawyer it goes to: the matter's outside lead lawyer, or a lawyer the company engages where no firm is on record. A missing email address is listed for the person who sends, to find before that draft goes.
We sit with your counsel and whoever keeps the matter list, write down how the weekly check-in really works, and set it up in the AI product your company has approved: ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini. Your company keeps control of how the work gets done.
What has been checked
Fully Powered AI wrote this workflow template in its own words, drawing on a published method credited below. It was editorially reviewed on 11 November 2026. It was tried on its invented example in Claude on 11 November 2026, and the record of those runs is published with it. 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 company means running it on two or three past weeks counsel remembers, with cases agreed first: an update exactly at the threshold, a date on record that has passed, a matter over budget, an open matter with no firm, a line in the internal notes that must not reach an email. Counsel checks every draft against the matter file before anything is sent. Pilot acceptance-test preparation sets those cases up, and what we test before we call an AI workflow ready describes the record we keep.
Who decides
Your people keep
- Counsel edits each draft and decides whether and when it is sent
- Counsel confirms the rule for each skipped matter
- Counsel decides what is done about a matter over budget or with no firm on record
It does not
- Gives no legal advice
- Decides nothing about meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or deadlines
- Sends, files, signs and calendars nothing
- Puts nothing into a mailbox and changes no record
- Instructs no firm and offers no view of the case
Questions people ask
Who is it for?
A company with several matters at outside firms at once, where the legal operations manager or matter coordinator runs it each week and the in-house counsel who owns the relationship with the firms reads every draft.
What do I need to supply?
The matter list exported from your matter system or a spreadsheet, the matter notes, the house settings counsel approves once, and today's date.
What does it not do?
It gives no legal advice and decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or deadlines; counsel edits each draft and sends it, and a lawyer decides and signs. It sends, files, signs and calendars nothing.
What do I get?
One draft request per matter that is due one, plus a run summary giving the rules used and every matter drafted or skipped, with the reason.
What has been checked?
It was editorially reviewed on 11 November 2026 and tried on its invented example in Claude, but it has not been reviewed by a lawyer.
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: