botminds.aiBook a walkthrough
WorkflowLaw Firm Risk, Intake & Compliance

Conflict Check

Conflict check software that expands a new matter’s parties into their corporate families, reads the prior matter file behind each hit, and drafts the waivers and the clearance memo for the Director of conflicts to sign.

Watch it workBook a walkthrough
See the nine screens behind one cleared matter ↓
Watch with transcript →
The problem

Hundreds of raw hits, and the real conflict under a name nobody typed

A partner submits a new matter with a handful of parties. The conflicts analyst types those names into the firm’s search and gets back a long list: look-alike names, closed matters, former clients. Each one is opened, read and cleared by hand, and the partner with the client on the phone cannot start work until the memo is signed.

The search finds only what the intake names. A parent that owns the client, the name the plaintiff traded under before, or an affiliate entered in the firm’s records under its local-language registry name turns up only if the analyst thinks to add it. Those are the hits that end in a disqualification motion, a forfeited fee or a claim.

Built forConflicts analystsDirectors of conflictsIntake partnersGeneral counsel

The Problem Today

A new matter names a few parties, but the conflict hides in a subsidiary, a former name or a foreign spelling.

8.2 h
of staff time per new matter spent on conflict checks published
21 h
average time to clear a check in a centralized team published

Read one at a time today

  • Searches
  • Hit lists
  • Old files
  • Waivers
  • Hundreds of raw hitsEach similar name opened and cleared one at a time
  • Partners kept waitingNo work starts until the memo is signed

The Solution

  1. Parties expandedEach named party becomes its parents, subsidiaries and former names
  2. Each hit readThe prior matter file behind each hit is read, with the passage cited
  3. Called under the rulesCurrent clients, former clients and imputation, each with its reason
  4. Memo signedWaiver requests and the clearance memo drafted; the Director signs

Built-in controls

  • Bars and current clients decided by the Director
  • No other client’s confidences in a waiver
  • Each hit kept with its reason; none dropped

What You Get

Partners learn what they can take and on what terms, with waivers drafted and each risk in writing.

2 h
of staff time per matter, down from 8.2 our estimate
  • Foreign-name subsidiaries foundRomanized and local spellings searched side by side
  • A rule behind each callCurrent, former and lateral conflicts, each with its source
  • Waiver letters ready to approveEach to the affected client, through its partner
From intake to signature

Conflict check software on nine screens, party graph to signed memo

A check moves through these screens as the work does: parties expanded, each hit read and called, letters drafted, the memo signed. Each names how it works and the role that relies on it.

  1. 01Party graph

    A party graph that marks each firm-matter link bar, waiver or cleared

    How it works

    • The new matter sits in the middle, linked to the 4 parties named at intake
    • Each party opens into its family: 31 entities, each with its raw-hit count
    • Firm matters sit on the outer columns, each link marked bar, waiver or cleared
    • A counter reads 212 raw hits, 203 cleared with a reason and 9 that matter

    Conflicts analystSees the nine hits that matter on one screen, with the rest already explained; no raw list left to clear one name at a time.

  2. 02The adverse party’s family

    Family expansion that finds parents, former names and local spellings

    How it works

    • Each named party grows into parents, subsidiaries, former names and officers
    • Each entity is cited to its registry extract, filing or page of the intake form
    • Local-language registry names are romanized and searched beside the English one
    • The adverse party alone becomes 13 entities with 118 hits

    Conflicts analystStops relying on memory to add the parent, the name a company traded under before, or the affiliate registered under a local spelling.

  3. 03The search, run again

    One search run across clients, matters, prior reports, waivers and walls

    How it works

    • 19 registry extracts and filings read to build the families
    • 96 name variants run, exact, fuzzy and romanized
    • The file behind 54 hits read, with no walled matter opened

    Conflicts analystGets one search that covers each spelling and each record type, so a former client filed under a transliterated name turns up the first time.

  4. 04Hits that need a person

    Every hit kept, each with its call and a one-line reason

    How it works

    • Hits grouped by party and filtered by call, from name only to bar
    • 158 name-only and 45 unrelated closed hits arrive cleared, each with its reason
    • Nine need a person, and none of the 212 is dropped
    • The analyst confirms the 203 cleared in one action

    Conflicts analystClears look-alike names and closed matters in one confirmed pass, and each one leaves a written reason on the record, not a tick.

  5. 05A bar on a current client

    A bar call with the waiver clause and scope that decide it

    How it works

    • The prior matter file read, with the passages that decide it highlighted
    • Four questions answered: current client, directly adverse, advance waiver, firm policy
    • The advance waiver covers transactional matters and excludes litigation
    • The proposal: take the third-party claim out of the scope

    Director of conflictsConfirms the bar knowing exactly why: the subsidiary the intake proposes to sue is an open client, and its waiver does not reach a lawsuit.

  6. 06A waiver for a related client

    Material-limitation calls on related clients who are not parties to the suit

    How it works

    • The prospective client’s customer is a current client of the firm
    • The defense blames that customer’s specification change and may need its documents
    • Separate teams and an unrelated subject make it consentable
    • The call: needs a waiver, with informed consent from both clients in writing

    Director of conflictsCatches the conflict an adverse-party search passes over: a related party whose own work at the firm could limit how hard the defense pushes.

  7. 07Conflict waiver letter

    Waiver requests drafted to each client, through its relationship partner

    How it works

    • Two consent requests and the prospective client’s own consent drafted together
    • Each letter cites the engagement-letter clause behind the request
    • A box states what the letter withholds: the new client’s name, defense theory and documents
    • Nothing goes out until the intake partner approves the 3 letters

    Intake partnerApproves letters that ask for consent without giving away another client’s confidences, instead of drafting each one from a blank page.

  8. 08Clearance memo

    A clearance memo that accounts for every hit before anyone signs

    How it works

    • A table of calls: 158 name only, 45 unrelated, 6 former clients, 2 waivers, 1 bar
    • The closest former-client call named, with its citation
    • Conditions tracked: scope narrowed, consents signed, wall in place
    • Signing stays locked until the bar is confirmed and the scope narrowed

    Director of conflictsSigns a memo that shows the reason behind each hit and the conditions still open.

  9. 09Audit trail

    One record of each search, each file read and each confirmed call

    How it works

    • Agents and people on one timeline, from the intake request to the memo draft
    • Each search, read, call and letter logged with its time
    • Held until ten years after the matter closes

    General counselHas the answer ready when a disqualification motion asks how the firm cleared the matter, what it read and who decided.

Two former clients under local-language names, and a bar inside the scope

Four findings from one new matter that a name-only search would have buried or missed.

A subsidiary the firm already acts for

The intake proposed a third-party claim against the foundry that cast the parts. It is an open client, and its advance waiver stops short of litigation. Bar, as framed.

Former clients filed under registry names

Two closed matters were opened only under the romanized and the pinyin registry names. A search by the English name finds neither; the name variants found both, and both cleared as former clients on unrelated work.

A customer whose own lawyers could limit the defense

The defense blames the customer’s specification change. It is not a party, but it is a current client, so both clients are asked for informed consent.

A name the plaintiff dropped years ago

The plaintiff traded under another name until its certificate of amendment. A closed warehouse-lease matter under that name is found, read and cleared: a lease, not substantially related.

Registry extracts, engagement letters and the walls file, read for each hit

What the agents read before they propose a call.

The intake formNamed parties, the proposed scope, the defense theory and the related parties the partner lists.
Registry extracts and filingsOwnership, former names, officers and local registry names, each entity cited to its extract.
Client and matter recordsOpen or closed, last billed, and the partner and team behind each firm matter a name hits.
Engagement and closing lettersAffiliate clauses, advance waivers and the letter that ended an engagement.
Prior conflict reports and waiversEarlier checks and consents, searched under each variant of each name.
Walls and lateral screensExisting walls and screens shown against each hit; for a walled matter, only the wall’s record is read.
Around the check

The rest of the conflict check, from the team queue to the duty matrix

What the Director, the analyst and the intake partner open around one matter.

The team’s open queue37 open requests, 14 due today and 1 over target, each with parties named against entities found, raw hits, hits that matter and time used.
Cleared, with reasonsThe 203 cleared hits, each with its firm record and one line: a dental practice, a flying club, an adverse party in a closed matter.
The closest former-client callA former client found only under its romanized name. The firm’s 2017–2018 ingot cost data is stale and not about castings: cleared, for the Director to confirm.
Consent from a related clientThe letter to the customer says the firm will not argue it breached a duty and routes any document request through its counsel.
How names are matchedA fuzzy threshold of 0.86, romanization, transliteration and legal-suffix stripping, run across all five record types. Only the Director or general counsel changes them.
Separation of dutiesAnalysts confirm name-only and unrelated hits; the Director confirms the rest and signs. Nobody clears their own matter, the intake partner included.

The calls the agents propose and a named person makes

The general counsel and the intake partner make these calls.

Confirming a current-client, former-client or bar callThe rules classifier proposes the call; the Director of conflicts confirms each one, by name.
Changing the scope of the matterOnly the intake partner narrows it, and an intake partner cannot clear their own matter.
Sending a letter to a clientLetters are drafted, never sent by an agent. The intake partner approves each one before it goes.
Reading a walled matterThe matter reader sees the wall’s record, never the documents behind it.
Treating an advance waiver as consent to litigationOnly when the waiver says so in its own words. Otherwise the hit goes to the Director.

Before a conflicts director trusts conflict check software

What is conflict check software?

Conflict check software searches a firm’s clients, matters and prior reports for the parties in a new matter, to show the work does not set the firm against a client it owes loyalty to. This solution expands each party into its corporate family, reads the file behind each hit, proposes a call and drafts the memo the Director of conflicts signs.

How does it find an affiliate registered under a local-language name?

The party expander reads registry extracts and annual reports for parents, subsidiaries, former names and officers. Local registry names are romanized or written in pinyin and searched beside the English name.

Who decides the calls that matter?

The analyst confirms look-alike names and unrelated closed matters. Current-client, former-client and bar calls go to the Director of conflicts, who confirms each by name and signs the memo. The intake partner owns the scope and cannot clear their own matter.

What goes into a conflict waiver letter?

What consent requires, and no more. Each letter goes to the affected client through its relationship partner, cites the engagement-letter clause behind the request, and states what it withholds. The intake partner approves each one before it is sent.

Is client data used to train models?

No. The matter records, letters and registry extracts are read inside the firm’s own workspace and are not used for training. Each search, read, call, letter and signature is logged and held through the matter and the retention period after it.

Law Firm Risk, Intake & Compliance

Other law firm risk and intake solutions

All 7 solutions →
Client Due Diligence for Law Firms

Every in-scope matter has client due diligence evidence an inspector will accept, traced to the people behind the client.

1-min filmNew Business Intake

Open approved matters the same day, with every risk question answered by a named person.

1-min filmEngagement Letter Generation

A signed engagement letter that says what the client's guidelines say, with every non-standard term decided by risk counsel.

1-min film

Rerun a matter you cleared last month
under every name its parties ever used.

We’ll expand its parties, call its hits and draft its memo beside the one your conflicts team signed.

Book a walkthroughBrowse solutions