Give every legal request an owner, every matter a clear next step, and every closure a reviewed outcome. Connect intake, actions, updates and outside counsel instructions in one adaptable workspace.
Free for up to five users. No credit card required.
Adapt fields, workflows, and dashboards without code. Explore 1,000+ app templates and use cases
Explore a fictional example. Sign in to preview or use the app.
A matter is more than a title and a status. The people doing the work need to understand why it exists, what is due next, what is missing and who can make the next decision.
Capture the business question, department, desired outcome, deadline and supporting material. Return incomplete requests with a specific explanation. Accepting a request confirms that legal will take it on; it does not imply the requested business action has been approved.
Create a matter with a responsible lawyer, scope, priority and next action. Keep the request reference and relevant documents together. Distinguish a business deadline from a court or statutory deadline, which needs the appropriate specialist process.
Assign follow-up work with its own owner and due date. Record information waits and external counsel deliverables. A matter can be active without every action being on track, so review the underlying commitments as well as the headline status.
Submit the proposed outcome for a named reviewer. In the example app, an incomplete closure is returned for correction. The final update checks the selected matter and its blocking work before recording closure, keeping the review decision separate from its actual result.
| Record | What belongs there | Why it helps |
|---|---|---|
| Request | Business question, requester, category, desired outcome and missing information | The team can decide whether to accept, decline or ask for more context. |
| Matter | Scope, responsible lawyer, priority, confidentiality, status and next action | A colleague can understand the work without reconstructing an email chain. |
| Action | A specific task, owner, due date, completion and closure dependency | A long-running matter does not conceal an overdue commitment. |
| Update | What changed, decision needed and next milestone | Managers receive a useful summary rather than a copy of every note. |
| Counsel instruction | Defined scope, deliverable, deadline and budget expectation | External work stays connected to the internal matter and agreed expectations. |
Use the intake queue to see the requested date, department and completeness before assigning the work. Make the reason for urgency visible so a business preference does not silently become the team’s highest priority.
Name the information or deliverable required, the person expected to provide it and the next follow-up date. Waiting is a useful state only when someone can explain what will restart the work.
Inspect the remaining actions and response delivery before accepting closure. A finished review task and a closed matter are different events: the example retains the actual outcome when current conditions prevent the requested change.
When the next decision concerns an agreement renewal, keep its dates and owner in the contract renewal workspace →
When Sales introduces a distributor-agreement review, add that request category and its counterparty and commercial-summary questions. Keep those questions out of routine policy requests. Then choose the reviewer and create a Sales matter view. In Jodoo, the team can make those connected changes to fields, workflows and dashboards without writing code.
Start with the categories and decisions you actually use. The example includes commercial, employment, policy and general advisory work. Adapt those choices, required fields, review steps and dashboard groupings to your legal service. Keep forms short enough that business teams will use them, while requiring the information the reviewer needs.
Use permissions and record visibility deliberately before introducing real matters. The shared example contains fictional data. A confidentiality label is useful context, but it is not an access restriction by itself: configure the intended roles and test what each user can see in your installed app.
Use this workspace to coordinate requests, matter ownership, actions, updates, instructions and review. It is particularly useful when the legal team’s process changes frequently or needs to connect to business requests in other Jodoo apps.
Use appropriate legal systems for court filings, jurisdiction-specific deadline calculation, legal holds, e-discovery, trust accounting or detailed legal e-billing. This app does not give legal advice or perform those functions. Approved document repositories can remain authoritative, with references recorded against the matter.
For the agreement record itself, use a contract tracker →
Design the questions, triage and correction path before opening more matters.
Improve request intakeSee ownership, waiting matters and next-action commitments together.
Review team workloadUse a focused form with questions matched to the type of legal help.
Start with a request formDownload a populated workbook with actions and status reporting.
Use a matter tracking spreadsheetSeparate changes, decisions needed and the next milestone.
Prepare a status reportDefine scope, exclusions, deliverables and reporting expectations.
Brief outside counselAgree on responsibilities and service expectations before launch.
Design the intake processDistinguish the capabilities your team needs from a generic feature list.
Write software requirementsConsider eight products by category, fit and implementation needs.
Compare legal matter toolsA matter is a unit of legal work. It might concern a contract, a policy question, employment guidance or another business request. A contract has its own parties, terms, revisions and obligations. Link the two when useful, while keeping contract lifecycle work separate from the broader matter record.
Yes. Start with a request queue and a matter register with clear ownership and next actions. Add action histories, reporting and closure review as the operating need grows. Evaluate a specialist suite instead when its legal-specific controls are central to your work.
No. Requests are triaged first. Accepted requests can be used to open the appropriate matter; declined requests retain their decision. This avoids assuming that every question needs a full matter. The example demonstrates intake decisions and linked matter work, not an automatic request-to-matter conversion.
No. Configure the installed app’s role, form and record permissions for the intended audience, then test them with authorized users. The public example uses fictional records and does not certify your organization’s access policy, privilege requirements or information-security obligations.
Open the example, explore the records and make your own copy to adapt it to your team.
Explore the legal matters app