/subpoena-triage

name: subpoena-triage
description: Triage a subpoena served on the company — classify it, analyze scope/burden/privilege, cross-check the portfolio, and produce an objections framework, compliance plan, and deadline calendar. Use when the user says "we got a subpoena", "served with a subpoena", or shares a subpoena, CID, or third-party document request to evaluate.
argument-hint: "[path-to-subpoena] [--slug=custom-slug]"

/subpoena-triage

1. Read the subpoena from provided path. 2. Classify (third-party-docs / third-party-depo / party / CID / grand-jury). 3. If grand jury → stop, escalate per `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md`. Otherwise continue. 4. Load `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/_log.yaml` for cross-check. Load `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md` → landscape, privilege conventions, escalation norms. 5. Follow the workflow and reference below. 6. Extract key fields, analyze scope/burden/privilege, produce objections framework + compliance plan + deadline calendar. 7. Write `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/inbound/[slug]/triage.md`. Copy or link subpoena to `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/inbound/[slug]/incoming.[ext]`. 8. Hand off: `/legal-hold --issue` if hold not in place; `/matter-intake` if materiality warrants; `/matter-briefing [slug]` if party subpoena in existing matter.

---

Subpoena Triage

Purpose

Subpoenas arrive with deadlines. The failure modes: missing the deadline, over-producing (privilege waiver, burden we should have objected to), under-producing (contempt exposure), or missing a motion-to-quash window. This skill classifies, analyzes, and produces a compliance plan with objections framework.

Jurisdiction assumption

The rule cited in Step 0 is the operative one for this subpoena in this forum. Subpoena practice varies materially: federal (FRCP 45) vs. state equivalents, state-to-state variants, local rules, court-specific standing orders, and the subpoena type (trial, deposition, document production) all change objection deadlines, place-of-compliance limits, privilege-log requirements, and cost-shifting. Every rule output here is a starting-point heuristic — confirm currency and the local variant before asserting in writing.

Side context

This skill is inherently defensive — a subpoena has been served on the recipient and the posture is respond/object/comply. Read `## Side` in the practice profile. If the user's default side is **plaintiff**, note that receiving a subpoena is common for plaintiffs too (witness subpoenas, third-party requests directed at the plaintiff's own records) but the framing here is always "subpoena served on us, how do we respond." If the user is **defense** (typical), the framing aligns with the default. If the matter has a different posture than the default (e.g., defense practitioner receiving a subpoena in a matter where they're pro se for a family member), prompt the user to confirm posture before proceeding.

Load context

• The subpoena document (user provides path or drops it in-session)
• `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/_log.yaml` — for related matter lookup and legal hold status
• `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md` → landscape (regulators we deal with), house privilege conventions, escalation norms

Workflow

Step 0: Research the applicable rule

**Before analyzing this subpoena, research the applicable rule of civil procedure for the forum (FRCP 45 for federal, the state equivalent otherwise) and the subpoena type (trial, deposition, document production). Identify: place-of-compliance limits, objection deadlines (these often run from the EARLIER of the compliance date or a fixed number of days after service), privilege-log requirements, and who bears costs. Cite with pinpoint references. Verify currency — rules and local variants change. Flag grand-jury subpoenas for immediate criminal-counsel escalation.**

**No silent supplement.** If a research query to the configured legal research tool (Westlaw, CourtListener, Trellis, Descrybe, or firm platform) returns few or no results for the forum's rule, variant, or pinpoint, report what was found and stop. Do NOT fill the gap from web search or model knowledge without asking. Say: "The search returned [N] results from [tool]. Coverage appears thin for [rule / forum / variant]. Options: (1) broaden the search query, (2) try a different research tool, (3) search the web — results will be tagged `[web search — verify]` and should be checked against a primary source before relying, or (4) stop here. Which would you like?" A lawyer decides whether to accept lower-confidence sources; the skill does not decide for them.

**Source attribution.** Tag every rule reference, case, statute, and regulation in the triage output with where it came from: `[Westlaw]`, `[CourtListener]`, `[Trellis]`, `[Descrybe]`, or the MCP tool name for citations retrieved from a legal research connector; `[web search — verify]` for citations from web search; `[model knowledge — verify]` for citations recalled from training data; `[user provided]` for citations the user supplied (e.g., from the subpoena or prior matter work). Citations tagged `verify` carry higher fabrication risk and should be checked first. Never strip or collapse the tags — they are counsel's fastest signal about which citations to verify before asserting in objections or filings.

Step 1: Classify

Subpoenas come in flavors with different rules; confirm the specifics against the rule you just researched:

• **Third-party document subpoena (civil)** — we're not a party to the litigation; someone wants our documents. Usual objection categories: relevance, burden, privilege, place-of-compliance / geographic reach.
• **Third-party deposition subpoena** — someone wants an employe