Scenario 02

---
name: extract-client-intake-facts-divorce-scenario-02
task_id: trusts-estates-private-client/extract-client-intake-facts/scenario-02
description: Extract and organize key facts from a disorganized client intake for a contested divorce matter, with emphasis on asset characterization, potential dissipation, transfer timing, and the client’s stated priorities.
activates_for: [planner, solver, checker]
---

# Skill: Extract Client Intake Facts — Divorce/Family Law Scenario (Variant)

## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting

- Treating an unsupported separate-property assertion as established when the file does not show a clear source-of-funds trail
- Flattening contested-divorce facts into a narrative instead of separating characterization, timing, control, and liquidity facts
- Missing dissipation signals embedded in scattered expense, transfer, and account activity references
- Overlooking whether an asserted home-retention goal is feasible given refinance, buyout, or debt-service facts
- Failing to distinguish what is stated in the intake materials from what still needs verification
- Omitting follow-up facts needed for tracing, valuation, and preservation

## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply

- Use the family-law intake lens centered on marital vs. separate characterization, commingling, tracing, appreciation, dissipation, maintenance-relevant facts, retirement-account issues, and digital-asset transfers
- Treat an asset claimed as separate as contested unless the source materials show a defensible paper trail for acquisition with separate funds or other recognized separate-source proof
- Treat a transfer of digital assets shortly before or during separation as a timing and concealment-risk fact that may warrant tracing, preservation, and account-access follow-up
- Treat suspicious business or personal spending as a dissipation issue when the facts suggest non-marital purpose, concealment, or unilateral depletion
- When the client states a priority such as keeping the home, frame that goal against available liquidity, debt capacity, title, and buyout/refinance constraints
- Use general divorce-property doctrines and the governing local family-law framework reflected in the source materials; do not invent unsupported statutory conclusions
- If a legal proposition is stated, identify the controlling authority or family-law doctrine supporting it rather than offering a bare conclusion

## 4. Analytical scaffolds

- First separate the facts into: parties, timeline, property, debts, income, transfers, expenses, children/household facts if any, and stated objectives
- For each asset or account, ask:
  - what it is
  - how it was acquired
  - whose name controls it
  - when it was acquired or transferred
  - what evidence supports separate vs. marital characterization
  - whether tracing is possible from the current record
- For each transfer or withdrawal, ask:
  - date or relative timing
  - source and destination
  - amount or other scale from the source materials
  - whether the timing coincides with separation, dispute escalation, or preservation concerns
  - whether the fact suggests concealment, dissipation, or ordinary household administration
- For each suspicious spending pattern, aggregate the identified categories into one dissipation summary while preserving the component items used to reach it
- For a home-retention objective, identify:
  - equity and debt facts
  - likely refinance or buyout constraints
  - assets the client appears willing to trade
  - whether the current record supports feasibility or only a stated preference
- For every contested fact, preserve the distinction between:
  - client assertion
  - documentary support
  - gap requiring follow-up
- If more than one asset, transfer, account, or period appears in the materials, enumerate them explicitly before analysis and keep each item separate in the memo

## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships (only if applicable)

- Map ownership and control vertically: account holder, beneficial owner, titled owner, user, signatory, and source of funds
- Map timing horizontally: premarital acquisition, marriage-period acquisition, pre-separation transfer, post-separation conduct, and current status
- Link related records across documents when one source explains, qualifies, or contradicts another
- Flag any mismatch between a stated characterization and the surrounding chronology, tax treatment, account title, or transfer trail
- Where the same asset appears in multiple forms, connect the forms rather than repeating the fact in isolation
- Highlight if a transfer precedes a filing, demand, or known dispute milestone by a short interval, but state the timing using the record’s own dates rather than extrapolation

## 6. Output structure conventions

- Produce a structured key-facts memo, not an argument memo and not a chronology only
- Use conventional headings such as:
  - Matter overview
  - Parties and relationship history
  - Key dates and procedural posture
  - Assets and liabilities
  - Transfers and account activity
  - Dissipation / concealment indicators
  - Client objectives and constraints
  - Open questions / follow-up needed
- Under assets and liabilities, separate each item into a discrete entry with characterization, control, source-of-funds clues, and unresolved issues
- Include a concise dissipation summary table when suspicious spending or depletion appears; preserve component categories and then state the combined concern
- Include a short transfer timeline when asset movement or digital-asset activity appears; pair each entry with the follow-up it requires
- Use an explicit status label for each key fact, such as confirmed / stated / disputed / unclear, so the reader can tell support level at a glance
- Keep quotations minimal; prefer paraphrase unless the wording itself is important
- End with a focused follow-up section that identifies what information, documents, or confirmations are still needed to complete tracing, characterization, or feasibility analysis