efirm-partner-review-routing
Rating is derived from the repo's GitHub stars and shown for reference.
name: efirm-partner-review-routing
description: Use when a document, decision, or action in the eFirm system requires partner-level review and approval before it can proceed. The skill defines the routing logic — which partner receives what type of review, at what threshold, with what SLA — and ensures that nothing requiring senior judgment is auto-processed or lost in a workflow queue. Part of the eFirm firm-management product suite.
license: MIT
metadata:
id: efirm.partner-review-routing
category: efirm
jurisdictions: [multi]
priority: P2
intent: [review-routing, approval, escalation, governance, workflow]
related:
- efirm-matter-creation-flow
- efirm-conflict-check
- efirm-engagement-letter-draft
- efirm-document-versioning-rule
- efirm-team-handoff-summary
source: Louis — HAQQ Legal AI (github.com/sboghossian/mini-claude-for-legal)
version: "1.0"
Partner Review Routing
When to use this
Use this skill to:
- Define which items in the eFirm workflow require partner review before proceeding.
- Route a specific document or decision to the correct partner based on matter type, risk level, and available capacity.
- Track the status of pending partner reviews and escalate overdue approvals.
- Set up the routing rules for a new firm or practice group deploying eFirm.
Partner review routing is the governance backbone of a law firm's operations. Without it, junior lawyers may unknowingly take on conflict-riddled matters, send unapproved fee quotes, or file documents without supervisory sign-off.
Items that always require partner review
The following workflow items must never be auto-processed without partner sign-off:
| Item | Routing target | SLA |
|---|---|---|
| New matter opening — conflict check result | Conflicts partner | 24 hours (business) |
| Engagement letter — before transmission to client | Responsible partner | 48 hours |
| Fee quote — before transmission to client | Responsible partner | 48 hours |
| Document marked vEXEC or vFINAL | Responsible partner | 24 hours |
| Invoice exceeding threshold (e.g., >,000) | Billing partner | 48 hours |
| Write-down above threshold (e.g., >10% of matter fees) | Billing partner | 48 hours |
| Trust account exception (negative balance, imbalance) | Managing partner | Immediate |
| AML flag at client intake | Compliance partner | Immediate |
| Conflict-check "Concern" result | Conflicts partner | 24 hours |
| Conflict-check "Conflict" result | Managing partner | Immediate |
| External filing (court, regulator) | Responsible partner | Before filing |
| Opinion letter | Responsible partner + senior review partner | 48 hours |
Routing logic
By responsibility type
| Review type | Default routing | Fallback if unavailable |
|---|---|---|
| Matter governance (conflict, engagement) | Responsible partner | Managing partner |
| Billing and financial | Billing partner | CFO / Finance director |
| AML / compliance | Compliance partner | Managing partner |
| Specific practice advice | Practice group head | Most senior available partner in practice |
| Urgent external filing | Responsible partner | Named emergency backup partner |
By urgency level
| Level | Trigger | SLA | Escalation if missed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate | Trust account exception; AML flag; active conflict | Within 2 business hours | Managing partner alert |
| Urgent | Court filing deadline T-1; conflict concern | Within 4 business hours | Managing partner alert |
| Standard | Engagement letter; fee quote; invoice approval | Within 48 business hours | Reminder at T+24h; escalate at T+48h |
| Routine | KB addition approval; template update | Within 5 business days | Reminder at T+3 days |
By document threshold
Firms may set financial thresholds above which additional sign-off is required:
| Threshold | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Fee quote > $[X] | Managing partner co-sign |
| Write-down > $[Y] | Billing partner approval |
| Invoice > $[Z] | Billing partner review before dispatch |
| Matter budget overrun > 20% | Responsible partner + client notification |
Thresholds should be set in firm configuration and referenced here.
Review workflow
- Item reaches review queue: eFirm creates a review task assigned to the designated partner.
- Notification: partner receives alert (push + email) with:
- Item type and description
- Matter reference
- Required action (approve / reject / amend + resubmit)
- Deadline
- Link to the item in eFirm
- Partner action:
- Approve: item proceeds; timestamp recorded; audit log entry written.
- Reject with comments: item returned to originator with partner comments.
- Request amendment: item held; partner adds notes; originator revises and resubmits.
- SLA tracking: if review is not completed within SLA, an escalation is sent to the next level in the chain.
Delegation rules
Partners may delegate review authority under defined conditions:
- Delegation must be recorded in eFirm (who delegated what to whom, for what period).
- Only delegation to another partner or senior counsel is permitted; delegation to associates is not allowed for the categories above.
- Delegations expire automatically after the specified period.
- The delegating partner remains responsible for all items approved under their delegation.
Out-of-office handling
When a partner is on leave:
- eFirm auto-routes items to the designated backup partner.
- Backup assignment is set by the managing partner at the start of any absence > 1 business day.
- If no backup is set, items escalate to the managing partner.
Audit trail
Every review action is recorded:
- Item ID + type
- Submitted by + timestamp
- Reviewed by (actual reviewer, not just assigned partner) + timestamp
- Action taken
- Any comments
- Final status
The audit trail is immutable and forms part of the matter file for all matter-related items.
Common failures
- Partner as rubber stamp: if partners approve without reading, the routing system provides false assurance. Quality review requires training and a firm culture of responsibility.
- No escalation: a review item that sits unanswered is as dangerous as no review. Escalation paths must be live and tested.
- Wrong routing target: if the conflicts partner is also the responsible partner (conflicted reviewer), route to an independent senior partner.
- Excessive items in queue: if partners are overwhelmed with routine approvals, the firm should consider raising financial thresholds or delegating more routine items to senior counsel.
Related skills
- [[efirm-matter-creation-flow]]
- [[efirm-conflict-check]]
- [[efirm-engagement-letter-draft]]
- [[efirm-document-versioning-rule]]
- [[efirm-team-handoff-summary]]