---

name: case-viability-report language: en description: Produces internal case viability and conflict check memos for personal injury litigation intake. Screens conflicts, assesses liability and damages, checks statute of limitations, and outputs an accept/decline recommendation. Use when evaluating new PI intake, running conflict checks, assessing case merit pre-filing, or preparing acceptance memos.

Case Viability & Conflict Check Report

Internal privileged memo evaluating a prospective PI matter for case acceptance, conflict clearance, and resource commitment.

Prerequisites

• Intake summary — client name, adverse parties, incident date, injuries, objectives
• Supporting documents — police reports, medical records, photos, insurance info
• Firm conflict database — current/former clients, pending matters
• Fee parameters — contingency rates, cost-advance policy, minimum case value thresholds

Quick Start

1. Gather intake summary and supporting documents
2. Run conflict screen against all parties and entities
3. Assess legal viability: claims, defenses, SOL, procedural bars
4. Project damages and calculate cost-benefit
5. Issue recommendation: ACCEPT / ACCEPT WITH CONDITIONS / DECLINE / DEFER
6. Draft executive summary with privilege designation

Memo Sections

1. Factual Summary

• Chronological narrative of key events
• All parties identified (client, adverse parties, insurers, witnesses, related entities)
• Client's stated objectives
• Gap analysis:

Missing Information	Impact (H/M/L)	Resolution Path
{item}	{level}	{method}

2. Conflict of Interest Analysis

Screen every person/entity against firm databases.

Check: prospective client + affiliates, all adverse parties (named and anticipated), insurers/adjusters, key witnesses, subject matter overlap.

For each conflict found:

Factor	Analysis
Type	Direct (Rule 1.7) / Former client (Rule 1.9) / Imputed (Rule 1.10) / Prospective (Rule 1.18)
Affected matter	{identify specifically}
Waivable?	Yes — informed written consent / No — {reason}
Proposed cure	Screening wall / Client consent / Decline

If clear: state affirmatively with search date range and scope. Flag jurisdiction-specific RPC variations with [VERIFY].

3. Legal Viability

A. Causes of Action — For each claim, table elements vs. supporting/undermining facts and available evidence.

B. Anticipated Defenses — For each defense (comparative negligence, assumption of risk, etc.), assess likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategy.

C. Statute of Limitations

• Applicable statute with citation
• Accrual date and basis
• Tolling doctrines (discovery rule, minority, incapacity)
• Filing deadline: {exact date}
• Urgency: > 6 months / < 6 months / < 90 days / EXPIRED

D. Procedural Requirements

• Subject matter and personal jurisdiction
• Venue proper
• Administrative exhaustion (if applicable)
• Pre-suit notice requirements (e.g., government tort claims)
• Mandatory arbitration clauses
• Standing confirmed

E. Red Flags

• Client credibility concerns
• Prior claims / litigation history
• Social media contradicting injury claims
• Pre-existing conditions overlapping claimed injuries
• Adverse precedent in controlling jurisdiction
• Uncooperative or unreachable client
• Criminal exposure or parallel proceedings
• Gaps in medical treatment

4. Financial Viability

Damages projection — estimate low/mid/high for: past medical specials, future medical, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, pain & suffering, punitive (if applicable).

Cost-benefit analysis — projected attorney hours, fee arrangement, hard costs (filing, depositions, experts), total firm investment, expected recovery × probability of success, ROI ratio.

Collectability — assess insurance coverage, defendant assets, judgment-proofing concerns.

Resource check:

• Firm has subject-matter expertise
• Staffing capacity available
• Co-counsel needed? (if so, identified)
• Strategic value beyond fees (reputation, referral source, precedent)

5. Recommendation

One of:

• ACCEPT — conditions listed
• ACCEPT WITH CONDITIONS — specify prerequisites (waivers, retainer, investigation)
• DECLINE — specific reasons + referral suggestions
• DEFER — specify information needed + decision deadline

Rationale: synthesize conflict status, legal merit, financial viability, and strategic alignment in 2-3 paragraphs.

6. Executive Summary

• 3-5 bullet key findings
• One-sentence recommendation
• Report date, preparing attorney, contributors
• Sources consulted and search scope
• Time-sensitive deadlines flagged
• Privilege designation: Attorney-Client Privileged / Work Product

Pitfalls & Rules

• Candor — internal document; sugar-coating risks harms the firm
• SOL precision — calculate deadlines exactly; flag < 90 days as urgent
• Collectability — never assume; verify insurance and assets
• Ethics rules — apply Model Rules of Professional Conduct; mark jurisdiction-specific variations with [VERIFY]
• Minimum case value — for contingency fees, apply firm threshold before recommending acceptance
• Citations — mark any unverifiable legal citation with [VERIFY]
• Privilege — state "Attorney-Client Privileged / Work Product" explicitly in output