Litigation Deadline Calendar

Litigation Deadline Calendar

This skill takes a scheduling order (PDF upload), determines the applicable procedural rules, extracts key dates, computes all backward deadlines, and generates an .ics calendar file the user can import into Outlook or Google Calendar.

Quick Start Workflow

1. Gather information from the user
2. Parse the scheduling order PDF
3. Verify the rules are current
4. Compute deadlines using the scripts
5. Generate .ics file and deliver to user

---

Step 1: Gather Information

Ask the user for the following. They may provide some of this upfront; fill in what you have and ask for the rest.

Required:

• The scheduling order PDF (uploaded file)
• Matter name (how the user wants it displayed on calendar entries, e.g., "Smith v. Jones Co.")
• Proceeding type: litigation or arbitration

If litigation:

• Jurisdiction: Try to determine from the scheduling order first. Look for the court name, case number format, or header to identify the jurisdiction. Common patterns:
  • "District Court, ___ County, Colorado" → Colorado
  • "United States District Court" → Federal
  • "Superior Court of California" → California
  • State name in the court caption → that state If the scheduling order clearly identifies the jurisdiction, confirm it with the user: "This appears to be a [State] case based on the court name. Can you confirm?" If you cannot determine the jurisdiction from the PDF, always ask the user explicitly. Never guess or default. The tool will raise an error if no jurisdiction is provided.
• Service method: electronic (default), mail, hand, or fax. Service method affects deadline computation differently per jurisdiction:
  • Colorado: e-service adds 0 days, mail adds 3 days
  • Federal: e-service adds 0 days, mail adds 3 days
  • California: e-service adds 2 court days, mail adds 5 days (10 out-of-state)
  • New York: e-service adds 5 days, mail adds 5 days (6 out-of-state)
  • Florida: e-service adds 0 days, mail adds 5 days
  • Georgia/Massachusetts/New Jersey: e-service adds 3 days, mail adds 3 days
  • Texas/Illinois/Pennsylvania/Ohio: e-service adds 0 days, mail adds 3 days For California and New York mail service, also ask whether service is in-state or out-of-state (use "mail" for in-state, "mail_out_of_state" for out-of-state).

If arbitration:

• Forum: AAA Commercial, AAA Employment, JAMS Comprehensive, or JAMS Streamlined

Optional (but check saved preferences first):

• Calendar application: Outlook (default) or Google Calendar. This controls the .ics output format. Google Calendar mode uses deterministic UIDs (so reimporting deduplicates), omits VTIMEZONE and VALARM blocks (Google ignores them), and uses LF line endings. Persistence: Before asking, check CLAUDE.md for a saved calendar_app preference (e.g., calendar_app: google or calendar_app: outlook). If found, use it silently — do not re-ask. If not found, ask the user which calendar app they use and save their choice to CLAUDE.md so it carries forward to future sessions. Example CLAUDE.md entry: calendar_app: google
• Attendee email addresses (people to invite to the calendar entries)
• Any deadlines they already know are unusual or modified by the court

Built-in jurisdictions (full rules database including state-specific holidays, service day additions, short-period computation thresholds, and discovery response periods): Colorado, Federal, California, New York, Texas, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, New Jersey, Massachusetts.

Other jurisdictions: The tool will use conservative federal-style defaults and the skill should perform a web search to verify the specific state's rules before computing. Always warn the user that non-built-in jurisdiction deadlines should be independently verified.

Present this as a simple conversation, not a form. For example: "What's the matter name as you'd like it to appear on calendar entries?" "Is this litigation or arbitration?" "This looks like it's from the District Court of Denver County — is this a Colorado state case?"

---

Step 2: Parse the Scheduling Order

Read the uploaded PDF using the Read tool. Extract every date mentioned in the order along with what it represents. Common dates to look for:

Litigation scheduling orders typically include:

• Trial date
• Discovery cutoff / completion date
• Dispositive motion deadline
• Pretrial / trial preparation conference date
• Deadline to amend pleadings
• Deadline to join parties
• Plaintiff expert disclosure deadline
• Defendant expert disclosure deadline
• Rebuttal expert disclosure deadline
• Mediation deadline
• Motions in limine deadline
• Proposed jury instructions deadline
• Witness and exhibit list deadline

Arbitration scheduling orders typically include:

• Hearing date(s)
• Discovery / information exchange cutoff
• Expert disclosure deadlines
• Pre-hearing brief deadline
• Exhibit exchange deadline
• Witness list deadline
• Dispositive motion deadline (if permitted)
• Mediation deadline

After parsing, show the user what you found and ask them to confirm before proceeding. Format it as a clean list:

"Here's what I extracted from the scheduling order:

• Trial Date: September 15, 2026
• Discovery Cutoff: July 28, 2026
• Dispositive Motion Deadline: June 15, 2026 [etc.]

Does this look right? Anything I missed or got wrong?"

This confirmation step is important because PDF parsing can miss dates or misinterpret them, and an error here cascades through every computed deadline.

---

Step 3: Verify Rules Are Current

Before computing deadlines, verify the rules and provide sources.

Verification procedure:

1. Search the web for the current text of the applicable rules AND any recent amendments:

   • For Colorado: search "Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure amendments [current year]" and "CRCP rule changes [current year]" on coloradojudicial.gov
   • For Federal: search "Federal Rules of Civil Procedure amendments [current year]"
   • For other states: search "[State] rules of civil procedure [current year]"
   • For AAA: search "AAA arbitration rules update [current year]"
   • For JAMS: search "JAMS arbitration rules update [current year]"

2. Verify state holidays. The tool has built-in holiday functions for 12 states, but holidays can and do change (states may add, rename, or remove holidays). Search for:

   • "[State] legal holidays [current year]"
   • "[State] court holidays [current year]"
   • "[State] court closures [current year]" Compare what you find against the holidays the script will compute. If a state has added, renamed, or removed a holiday, tell the user and adjust the computation. Getting a holiday wrong can silently shift deadlines by a day.

3. For built-in jurisdictions, compare what you find against the reference files and the STATE_RULES dictionary in scripts/compute_deadlines.py:

   • Colorado: references/colorado-crcp.md
   • Federal: references/federal-frcp.md
   • Arbitration: references/arbitration-rules.md
   • Other built-in states: check the STATE_RULES entry in the script

4. If you find a discrepancy (in rules OR holidays):

   • Tell the user: "I found that [rule/holiday X] was changed on [date]. The built-in version says [old]; the current version says [new]. I'll use the updated version for this calculation."
   • Use the corrected rule or holiday for computation.

5. If you cannot verify (e.g., search fails):

   • Tell the user: "I wasn't able to verify whether the [jurisdiction] rules have been updated recently. The built-in rules are current as of early 2026. You may want to independently confirm the key time periods."

For non-built-in jurisdictions (any state other than Colorado): Search for the specific state's rules of civil procedure, focusing on:

• Time computation rules (equivalent of Rule 6)
• Discovery response deadlines
• Expert disclosure deadlines
• Summary judgment timelines
• Legal holidays

Present what you find to the user for confirmation before computing.

Source citation requirement — this is mandatory: After verifying the rules, always provide the user with a "Sources" section listing the specific URLs where they can independently check the rules being applied. This is critical because the user manages outside counsel and needs to be able to verify the rules independently. Format:

"Sources for [Jurisdiction] rules used in this calculation:

• Rule description: [URL to official source or authoritative reference]

Preferred official sources by jurisdiction:

• Colorado: coloradojudicial.gov or courts.state.co.us
• Federal: law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp or uscourts.gov
• AAA: adr.org
• JAMS: jamsadr.com
• Other states: the state judiciary's official website

If you cannot find an official source for a rule, say so explicitly rather than omitting the citation.

---