“Can you take a look at this case?” leaves a receiving lawyer with several unanswered questions. There may be a hearing on Friday, a camera recording about to expire, or a client waiting for advice on an offer. Put that problem in the referral email. Until another firm accepts the matter and responsibilities are settled, the referring lawyer still needs a plan for the work already on the calendar.
Put the immediate problem on the first page
Court, cause number, service status, next setting: put those at the top of a filed-case referral. Below them, summarize discovery completed and any offer awaiting a decision. The scheduling order belongs in the attachments, along with the event history and proposed client and party names. A receiving lawyer should be able to find the next deadline on opening the file.
- Event and proposed accrual dates, authority, calculation, unresolved assumptions, and assigned verifier.
- Section 16.003: general two-year period for many injury actions; applicable notice, tolling, and exceptions.
- Additional timing issues: minors, estates, healthcare, public entities, contracts, interstate events, federal law.
- Next filing or hearing, controlling rule or order, and responsible lawyer while acceptance is pending.
- Current clients, representation scope, and conflicts-review information.
Does the proposed client list include both a driver and a passenger? Their accounts may agree today and diverge after the defense raises the driver’s conduct. A spouse, estate, employer, or employee can introduce other conflicts. Give the receiving firm enough information to run its own review. The scope of representation and acceptance need to be confirmed before either firm treats the handoff as complete.
Show the element that needs proof
| File question | What receiving counsel needs |
|---|---|
| Who is the responsible entity? | The full legal name and its role, checked against registrations, public records, incident materials, employment records, contracts, control, and insurance leads. |
| Which element is disputed? | The actual witness, document, recording, or test supporting it. In a premises claim, address knowledge of the condition as well as its existence. |
| What is the competing account? | Contrary testimony or data, unfavorable contract terms, prior complaints, and what has been done to investigate them. |
| What is missing? | The source, custodian, risk of loss, next action, and person assigned to follow up. |
Distinguish a driver's conduct from a direct claim against the carrier. In a product case, identify the alleged defect and causal mechanism. Review claimant conduct and possible responsible third parties under Chapter 33. A later record may require changing the theory or pleading; update the memorandum too.
Send originals and the preservation history
Send the preservation requests, dated replies, and outstanding requests with a collection record: sender, collector, date, selected interval, delivered interval, and known omissions. Identify client originals and witnesses still to be interviewed. Keep liability, causation, damages, and payment resources separate in the assessment.
- Truck: onboard data, electronic logs, dispatch, telematics, cameras, phone information, inspections, maintenance, and custodians.
- Premises: adjacent cameras, inspection entries, employee messages, work orders, vendor records, and camera blind spots.
- Keep a product’s components available for review with the item itself. The file should account for custody, repairs, warnings, relevant firmware, and examinations already performed.
Here is a hypothetical handoff problem. The email says “video obtained.” The attachment is a two-minute clip beginning immediately before the fall. Nobody has checked whether the same camera recorded the preceding hour. Receiving counsel needs to know that now, while there may still be something to request. A preservation request should identify the camera, location, custodian, interval, retention period, and native data or metadata needed. Note unanswered vendor requests and whether prompt court relief is warranted.
Destructive testing needs an advance plan for appropriate notice, access, and documentation. Lost evidence requires a separate spoliation analysis under the governing legal requirements.
Identify the support behind each loss
| Issue | Records and questions for review |
|---|---|
| Medical causation | A chronology of prior complaints and function, first post-event care, imaging, treatment, restrictions, gaps, and later events. Identify the condition, mechanism, course, alternative causes, and need for qualified testimony. |
| Past medical expenses | Reconcile charges, adjustments, payments, balances, and agreements. Section 41.0105 limits incurred-expense recovery to amounts paid or incurred by or for the claimant. Review insurance, letters of protection, funding, and affidavits under the governing law. |
| Future care | Medical support for the service, timing, duration, and quoted cost. Distinguish a current recommendation from a conditional option. Resolve overlapping costs and explain alternative courses without adding incompatible scenarios. |
| Repayment | Actual notices, asserted legal rights, balances, disputes, and resolution steps. Medicare, Medicaid, ERISA, workers' compensation, hospital, and provider claims can require different analysis. |
| Work and services | Payroll, schedules, absence dates, work notes, duties, reviews, tax and business records, contracts, expenses, replacement labor, accommodations, and observations. Separate gross receipts from personal earnings and delayed work from lost work. A young claimant or unpaid household-services claim may need a different method. |
You need the old back-treatment records to assess an aggravation claim. You also need to know what the claimant could actually do before the accident. Give the physician both favorable and unfavorable material about prior function. Review causation diagnosis by diagnosis: the proof for an immediate fracture may differ from the proof for later cognitive complaints.
Two related guides address questions that often require a longer records review: medical bills and future care, and lost income and earning capacity. A return to the same pay is worth explaining. It may leave a disputed capacity loss, but counsel should not claim missed earnings for a period in which none were lost.
Budget the expert work by question
Put an estimated cost and disclosure date next to each assignment below. Add the missing document and the decision that the review will help you make. That gives the receiving lawyer a way to choose the next expenditure.
| Assignment | Foundation to check before commissioning a report |
|---|---|
| Medical | Condition-specific causation, restrictions, and prognosis. Identify whether surgery, attendant care, or inability to work is supported, conditional, or absent from the record. |
| Vocational | Jobs the person could obtain and perform, medically supported restrictions, accommodations, skills, education, history, and retraining feasibility. |
| Economic | Earnings, benefits, work life, growth, discounting, applicable tax treatment, and contingencies. Match the assumed return to work and disability to medical and vocational support. |
| Technical | The defect, mechanism, or data question. Consider an initial engineering screen before a product test, or prompt technical help if a source may disappear. |
A photograph review is not a completed product examination. In that hypothetical, record the engineer’s preliminary view as preliminary. List the materials reviewed and contrary facts supplied. Check qualifications, conflicts, methods, and prior testimony; obtain a further review when new evidence affects the foundation.
Plan discovery and motions from the disputed issue
Corporate topics: policy, incident, software, audit history. Use defensible subject, place, and time limits under discovery levels and orders; address objections before seeking proportionate relief.
The final Rule 166a amendments govern motions filed on or after March 1, 2026. Rule 166a(d)(1) states:
“Except on leave of court or agreement of the parties, the nonmovant must file a response within 21 days after the motion is filed.”
Supreme Court of Texas, Misc. Docket No. 26-9012, page 4
For unavailable evidence, Rule 166a(d)(3) addresses affidavits or declarations and relief. Apply the operative rule and orders.
- Jury outline by defendant: required findings, responsibility allocation, nonduplicative damages; update with discovery.
- Disputed proof, current offer, fees, expenses, repayment, further spending, and estimated net recovery.
- Delay, uncertainty, the client’s financial pressure, and concerns about testimony.
Confirm the referral arrangement and working file
If another firm’s funding or trial staff is needed, make the inquiry while there is still time to use that help. An approaching disclosure deadline leaves little room for a new specialist to review the file. Identify the inspection, medical review, or other task that prompted the referral. Neither a new lawyer nor a larger budget changes a deadline already missed.
Use the following handoff check with the receiving lawyer. Keep a record of the answers and any item that remains unresolved.
| Handoff item | Documents and decisions |
|---|---|
| Client and engagement | Client identities, conflict-check information, existing agreements, proposed representation scope, and whether the arrangement is consultation, association, or referral. |
| Who does the work | Assigned lawyers for client calls, filings, expenses, discovery, settlement recommendations, trial, and pending dates during acceptance. Aaron Herbert’s intended role, discussed directly if material. |
| Fee division | Rule 1.04(f): proportional professional services or joint responsibility; aggregate-fee requirements; advance written client consent with participating lawyers or firms, division basis, and shares or applicable basis of division. The rule requires that “the client consents in writing to the terms of the arrangement prior to the time of the association or referral proposed.” Keep the agreement and consent. |
| Working file | First-page summary, calendar, offers, urgent decisions, chronology, evidence ledger, originals or secure locations, preservation history, medical and employment records, financial and funding records, and repayment documents. |
| Unfinished work | Witness contacts, missing records, unfavorable facts, client goals, expert materials reviewed, and privilege/discovery questions. Filed cases: current pleadings, discovery, orders, motions, hearings, and deadlines. |
| Credential and capacity | Individual TBLS Personal Injury Trial Law credential, current status, recent comparable work, conflicts, staffing, and resources. Certification is subject to TBLS standards and continuing requirements; no guarantee of availability, settlement, or expert admission. |
| Acceptance | Firm confirmation of current criteria, staffing, geographic scope, arrangements, responsible counsel, and acceptance. Send the issue and next deadline for independent evaluation. This is general information. |
Sources
- TBLS Personal Injury Trial Law standards
- Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, current official compilation
- Texas Rules of Evidence, effective July 2, 2026
- Texas Supreme Court, final Rule 166a amendments (26-9012)
- Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct
- Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Chapter 16
- Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Chapter 33
- Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Chapter 41
ABOUT THE ATTORNEY
Aaron A. Herbert
Founding Attorney
Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law
Aaron founded The Law Firm of Aaron A. Herbert in 2010 to focus on developing each client's case and seeking its maximum value. For over a decade, he has represented people seriously injured in major accidents and industrial catastrophes, pursuing trial verdicts and settlements while working to reduce the stress of litigation.
Education
- Texas A&M University · B.S., Criminal Justice, 1999
- University of Oklahoma College of Law · J.D., 2002; graduated in the top of his class
Trial experience & approach
Aaron earned numerous jury verdicts at boutique personal injury litigation firms. According to his biography, he spent a year as the top-earning litigation attorney at a firm that frequently appeared in verdict searches as having one of the highest numbers of trial wins in Texas. At another Dallas personal injury firm, he moved from managing pre-litigation attorney to managing litigation attorney over seven years as the firm grew into one of Dallas's largest personal injury firms.
His biography describes a reputation as one of America's most aggressive trial lawyers, with noteworthy recoveries from judges and juries and substantial pretrial settlements. Most of those settlements included confidentiality agreements requested by the defense. Aaron has said the recoveries were justified by the injuries and losses involved, which no amount of money could make someone choose to experience.
His approach combines passion, preparation, persistence and courtroom imagination. He believes a well-supported, engaged and motivated team working cooperatively helps deliver strong representation, with the goal of achieving the best possible result for every client.
Dallas roots, military service & publication
Born and raised in Dallas, Aaron enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school and later received an Honorable Discharge. He completed his university and law degrees after his military service and became a lifelong Sooners football fan in law school.
Publication: “Litigating Dog Bite Cases,” Texas Dog Law Seminar, Dallas, 2009.
Professional affiliations & recognition
Professional affiliations and recognition listed in Aaron’s biography:
- State Bar of Texas
- American Bar Association
- Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now American Association for Justice)
- Texas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Bar Association
- Tarrant County Bar Association
- Million Dollar Advocates Forum
- The National Trial Lawyers – Top 100 Trial Lawyers
Trial experience & approach
Aaron earned numerous jury verdicts at boutique personal injury litigation firms. According to his biography, he spent a year as the top-earning litigation attorney at a firm that frequently appeared in verdict searches as having one of the highest numbers of trial wins in Texas. At another Dallas personal injury firm, he moved from managing pre-litigation attorney to managing litigation attorney over seven years as the firm grew into one of Dallas's largest personal injury firms.
His biography describes a reputation as one of America's most aggressive trial lawyers, with noteworthy recoveries from judges and juries and substantial pretrial settlements. Most of those settlements included confidentiality agreements requested by the defense. Aaron has said the recoveries were justified by the injuries and losses involved, which no amount of money could make someone choose to experience.
His approach combines passion, preparation, persistence and courtroom imagination. He believes a well-supported, engaged and motivated team working cooperatively helps deliver strong representation, with the goal of achieving the best possible result for every client.
Dallas roots, military service & publication
Born and raised in Dallas, Aaron enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school and later received an Honorable Discharge. He completed his university and law degrees after his military service and became a lifelong Sooners football fan in law school.
Publication: “Litigating Dog Bite Cases,” Texas Dog Law Seminar, Dallas, 2009.
Professional affiliations & recognition
Professional affiliations and recognition listed in Aaron’s biography:
- State Bar of Texas
- American Bar Association
- Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now American Association for Justice)
- Texas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Bar Association
- Tarrant County Bar Association
- Million Dollar Advocates Forum
- The National Trial Lawyers – Top 100 Trial Lawyers