General preparation · Source checked 2026-11-09 · AI-assisted editorial

Who Will Handle the Work? Questions About a Proposed Legal Team

Ask a proposed legal team to describe who will do the work, who will make legal decisions, and how questions reach the responsible attorney. A firm name alone does not answer those questions. This is a practical conversation guide, with Pennsylvania sources identified where relevant.

In this article

Map the people to the tasks

Start with the attorney who would be responsible for your matter. Then ask which other people you may hear from and what each person handles. A staff member might arrange appointments or request records; your question is who reviews legal issues and explains decisions to you.

Use actual tasks rather than job titles. Who reads an incoming petition? Who prepares you for testimony? Who checks whether a requested record has arrived? Who would attend a hearing? If those assignments can change, ask how you would be told and how continuity would be maintained.

Write down an unanswered role question instead of treating an impressive title as an answer. You do not need to demand that one attorney personally perform every administrative task. You do need to understand the responsibility behind the plan being proposed.

Agree on a route for different questions

Ask where to send a new notice and how to identify that it contains a scheduled event or response instruction. Separately ask how to raise an ordinary status question. An arrangement that makes sense for sending a document may not be the best route for a discussion about strategy.

Discuss what happens when the usual contact is unavailable. Ask whether another attorney covers time-sensitive matters and how a message is acknowledged. A proposed response practice is something to clarify with the office, not a universal guarantee this page can supply.

Pennsylvania Rule 1.4 addresses keeping clients reasonably informed, reasonable requests for information, and explanations needed for informed decisions. It does not turn every missed message into a conclusion about misconduct or impose the response timetable you might prefer.

Understand additional lawyers and outside work

If another lawyer or firm would participate, ask what that person will do and how that affects communication and the proposed agreement. Pennsylvania Rule 1.5(e) addresses fee division between lawyers in different firms, including client awareness and no objection to participation. It does not mean every team arrangement has the same structure.

The Pennsylvania hearing guide explains that obtaining medical evidence and responding to the other side’s evidence may be part of a disputed case. Ask who would coordinate that work and what you would need to provide. Do not assume a promise to “handle the claim” answers each task.

Confirm your understanding

After the discussion, try a plain summary: “My understanding is that this attorney is responsible for the legal work, this person handles scheduling, and I send new notices through this channel.” Ask the office to correct anything inaccurate.

Keep the answer with the proposed representation documents so that you can refer to it later. This role map helps you assess whether the plan is understandable; it does not rank firms or predict an outcome. Individual questions about the agreement require individual advice.

Sources and scope

Checked 2026-11-09. These sources explain the Pennsylvania background identified below. The organizing methods and suggested questions on this page are editorial guidance, not filing requirements.

204 Pa. Code Rule 1.4: Communication — Rule 1.4(a)(3)-(4), (b).
204 Pa. Code Rule 1.5: Fees — Rule 1.5(e)(1)-(2). Source amendment note: November 25, 2020.
WCOA: Important Information About the Petition Filing and Hearing Process (LIBC-387) — Page 1 Attorney Representation; page 2 medical reports and testimony. Brochure revised April 2018; use current WCOA information for administrative routes.