Connect legal intake, client collaboration and the systems your firm already uses
We build the handoff between your intake system, your client portal and the practice-management system that stays your record. We prove it small first: an approved intake becoming a matter-ready record, without anyone retyping it.
This is a new industry for us, and we say so throughout this page. The first step is a discovery call and a small pilot.
Intake, the matter record and client collaboration rarely share a system
A firm rarely buys one system for this. It buys an intake tool, a practice-management system, a signature tool and a portal, at different times, from different vendors.
The intake tool and the matter system are different products
The intake CRM captures the inquiry and the engagement decision. The practice-management system holds the open matter, conflicts and billing. Moving a record from one to the other takes engineering work.
Client collaboration crosses tools no one designed together
Documents sit in a shared drive, a signature goes through a separate tool, and a follow-up lands in a personal inbox. The client experiences one relationship. The firm's systems do not.
Approval points get lost in software built for volume
Conflict checks and client acceptance belong to an attorney. Intake software is built to move an inquiry forward fast, and that speed can bury the approval step instead of surfacing it.
Every tool solves a real problem and adds a login
An intake tool, a portal, a signature product and a document system each earn their place over time. What is usually missing is the connection between them.
We have not interviewed law firms for this site yet. These are structural patterns in how intake, practice-management and collaboration tools are typically sold and connected. They come from public documentation, not from conversations with your firm. We will say so if we think a problem here does not apply to you.
A handoff around the systems you already run
The practice-management system stays the record of the matter and the billing. What we build is the handoff around it, so an intake tool and a portal agree with it instead of a spreadsheet.
- Intake staff
- Log an inquiry once, see which stage it is in, and know which document or signature is still missing.
- Attorney
- Reviews the summary, clears the conflict question and approves the engagement. Nothing earlier counts as acceptance.
- Client
- Uses a permissioned portal to send documents, sign forms and see where the matter stands.
- Office or practice manager
- Sees where a handoff is stalled and whether it is waiting on a system or on a person.
- Intake CRM (for example Clio Grow or Lawmatics)
- Captures the inquiry, the consultation and the engagement status.
- Practice management (for example Clio Manage)
- Stays the record of the open matter, conflicts and billing. Nothing we build replaces it.
- Document and e-signature tools
- Signed agreements and engagement letters stay where they are already trusted. We connect to them.
- Client portal
- The permissioned view a client sees, built on the systems above.
An approved intake becoming a matter-ready handoff
Larkspur Estate Partners is a firm we invented to show how an approved intake becomes a matter-ready record. It does not exist. No real firm, client or matter appears in this demonstration.
The prototype takes a completed intake through identity verification, an attorney's conflict and engagement decision, and a handoff to the practice-management system with the right permissions set. It writes once, even on a retry, so a slow connection never creates a duplicate matter.
Inquiry
An inquiry arrives in the intake CRM with a name, a matter type and a preferred contact method.
Verification
Staff confirm identity and matter type before anything moves further. Nothing here decides a conflict.
Attorney approval
An attorney reviews the summary, clears the conflict question and approves the engagement. The software waits for that decision; it never makes it.
Matter-ready handoff
The approved record writes once to the practice-management system, with permissions set and no duplicate entry, even on a retry.
What this does not show. No real firm, client or matter is shown here. Larkspur Estate Partners is invented. No practising lawyer has reviewed it yet, and we have not delivered a legal system for a firm. It shows the shape of one handoff. Conflict clearance, client acceptance and legal advice come from an attorney; the software never performs them.
Discovery, one handoff, a pilot, then your decision
Every step leaves you with something useful, even if you decide to stop there.
Discovery call
We learn which systems you run today, where the handoff breaks and what a good result looks like. You get a short written summary.
Map one handoff
A map of one handoff, for example intake to engagement: who does what, in which system, and where an attorney's decision belongs.
Scoped proposal
A fixed scope for a pilot: what gets built, for whom, how we judge it and what it costs.
Working pilot
A small group of your staff use it with real intakes, while the systems you run today keep working.
Your decision
You compare the pilot with how the handoff worked before, and choose: stop, extend it, or plan a wider rollout.
Rollout and support
A staged rollout to more staff or matter types, with maintenance agreed in writing before it starts.
The questions worth asking before this is a good idea
- Who owns the code?
- You do. What we write lives in your own repository. Where we build on an open-source base, we name it and its licence before you commit to anything.
- Does this replace our practice-management system?
- No. Practice management, Clio Manage is a common example, stays the record of the matter and the billing. What we build sits beside it and keeps intake and the portal aligned with it.
- Who decides conflicts and accepts a client?
- An attorney at your firm, always. The software surfaces the question; a lawyer clears every conflict and accepts every client.
- Who maintains it after handoff?
- Settled in writing before the pilot starts: who upgrades it, who is on call when it breaks, and what that costs every month. Us, your team, or a mix of both.
- What about client confidentiality?
- We design for controlled access and a clear record of who saw what. We hold no formal confidentiality accreditation and make no such claim. Meeting your firm's ethical obligations is your responsibility; we build to support that judgment.
- Where does AI fit?
- Inside the workflow: drafting a summary, flagging a missing document, or watching for a stalled handoff, always with a person reviewing it. Conflicts, client acceptance and advice on a matter stay with an attorney.
Seven things to know before you fix an intake handoff
Most firms can gather this in an afternoon. It shortens every conversation that follows, ours or anyone else's.
- Which system holds the inquiry, and which one holds the open matter
- The handoff that breaks most often: inquiry to consultation, consultation to engagement, or engagement to matter open
- Who reviews the conflict question today, and what they see in order to do it
- Every place a client's documents or signature can end up: portal, email, a shared drive, a signature tool
- Whether the systems you use today exchange data automatically, and in which direction
- Who would maintain new software, and whether anyone on staff is technical
- What result would make you stop the project
Plain answers
- How long does a pilot take?
- It depends on the handoff and the systems involved. We set the length in the proposal, after we map the workflow, not before.
- What does it cost?
- We quote a fixed scope for the pilot once the handoff is mapped. We do not publish a price list, because the scope decides the cost.
- We are a small firm. Is this for us?
- A firm with one clear, repeated handoff and a partner willing to sponsor a pilot is a good fit. If a packaged intake tool would serve you better, we will say so.
- Have you worked with a law firm before?
- Not yet. Legal is a new industry for us. Our CRM and workflow experience comes from other industries, and the demonstration on this page is synthetic and labelled as such. The first engagement is a discovery call and a small pilot.
Two people, new to legal, who have built software together for years
Legal Workflow Studio is a site of The Goodstack Company. There is no sales team. You talk to the people who would do the work, and we say plainly what we know and do not know about legal practice.
David
David runs beLoved Health, a distribution company, and built the system it runs on: CRM, wholesale portal, invoicing, samples and affiliate payouts. He writes the code and runs the pilots.
Vidur
Vidur is the co-founder of Goodstack and leads product and design. He designed the original Goodstack and ran the studio with David. He has experience with SOC 2 compliance, which matters the moment a system touches a customer's data.
Start with one handoff
Tell us which systems you run today and which handoff breaks most. We will reply with what we would look at first, including whether legal software fits yet.