Identify the filing context
Record the court, judge, case, document, and filing date. Ask counsel to identify the rules and orders relevant to the proposed submission.
A template from another matter may not reflect the requirements of this court or judge.
Search the official requirements
Check current local rules, standing orders, judge procedures, and case-specific directions using official sources. Record what was reviewed and when.
Do not infer an AI-specific requirement from a news story or another court's practice. Locate the applicable text.
Translate requirements into checks
If a requirement concerns verification, disclosure, or a certification, identify the actual act and the person responsible. Keep the source wording with the checklist.
Do not add a representation the signer cannot truthfully make. The drafting process should preserve the evidence behind required statements.
Test a late drafting change
Suppose a new AI-assisted paragraph is added after citations were checked. Revisit the affected verification rather than treating the earlier review as covering the changed text.
Record the final source and factual checks performed on the version intended for filing.
Save the filing review record
Keep the applicable requirements, completed checks, approved document, and responsible reviewer. Update the record if the court issues a new direction.
Judicio assists research and drafting. Counsel remains responsible for compliance with the actual court's rules and for every representation in the submission.
Sources and next steps
This is an editorial workflow guide for legal professionals. The suggested checks are our practical recommendations, not a statement that a regulator requires a particular software workflow.
Explore Drafting and File Library, or review Judicio's regional coverage and limitations. Check the underlying source and your organisation's approved process before relying on an output.