Document checklists & filing plans WIP
Document checklists give filers plain-language guidance about documents that often go with a case type. They do not decide which documents an individual must file and do not block a filer from proceeding.
1. Defining case type matching & guidance
Checklists match against the human-readable names returned by the court e-filing system (never hardcoded numeric codes).
# efile_app/efile/static/config/states/illinois.yaml
case_types:
name_change:
extends: "base_case_types.name_change"
# Court names returned by the EFSP
matches:
names:
- "Name Change" # Cook County County Division
- "Change of Name" # Statewide Circuit Courts
aliases:
- "Petition - Change of Name"
# Plain-language explanation for filers
about:
summary: >-
A name change asks a judge to make your new name official. Most of the
work is paperwork: a request that says who you are and what you want to
be called, notice in a newspaper so the change is public, and an order
for the judge to sign.
learn_more_url: "https://www.illinoislegalaid.org/legal-information/changing-your-name"
learn_more_label: "Changing your name in Illinois (Illinois Legal Aid Online)"
documents:
petition:
label: "Request for name change"
requirement: always
role: lead
description: "Your name now, the name you want, and how long you have lived in Illinois."
filing_type_names:
- "Petition for Name Change"
- "Petition"
- "Complaint"
proposed_order:
label: "Proposed order for the judge to sign"
requirement: always
filing_type_names:
- "Proposed Order"
- "Order"
- "Other Document Not Listed"
publication_notice:
label: "Proof of newspaper publication"
requirement: usually
description: "Notice published in a local newspaper once a week for three consecutive weeks."
filing_type_names:
- "Certificate of Publication"
- "Affidavit of Publication"
2. Requirement levels
Checklist items are grouped into three tiers. The YAML keys describe how often a document goes with this kind of filing. Filers see softer labels, because LITEfile cannot know which forms a particular filer's situation calls for:
| Requirement level | Displayed as | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
always | Commonly included | Documents that almost every filing of this type includes, such as the form that opens the matter. |
usually | Often included | Standard documents included in most filings of this type. |
sometimes | May apply | Documents that depend on specific facts. |
The checklist never blocks a filer. Filers can continue with any item unticked, and they are never asked to confirm that the list is complete.
3. Two-sided cases & role-based checklists
In cases with two opposing sides (such as landlord/tenant evictions or domestic relations), the landlord and tenant need completely different documents and instructions.
Configure filer_roles to create role-tailored checklists:
case_types:
eviction:
filer_roles:
landlord:
label: "The Landlord (or property owner/agent)"
description: "You are asking the court to regain possession of the property."
party_type_keywords: ["plaintiff", "landlord"]
tenant:
label: "The Tenant (or occupant)"
description: "You are defending an eviction or responding to court notice."
party_type_keywords: ["defendant", "tenant"]
documents:
complaint:
label: "Eviction Complaint"
requirement: always
role: lead
for_roles: ["landlord"] # Only shown to landlords
appearance:
label: "Appearance and Answer"
requirement: always
for_roles: ["tenant"] # Only shown to tenants
proof_of_service:
label: "Proof of Service"
requirement: usually
by_role:
landlord:
label: "Proof that the tenant was served with court papers"
description: "Filed by the sheriff or special process server."
tenant:
label: "Proof that you sent a copy of your answer to the landlord"
requirement: always
Approval and maintenance
Examples above illustrate the schema; their local rule statements require
current partner/court review before reuse. The document finder and filing-plan
checklists share efile/services/document_checklists.py, including role and
lead-document conditions. Keep both non-blocking when reviewing wording.
Use the shared maintenance register and the per-guide approval table instead of treating a YAML merge as legal approval. For each checklist record case family/court/stage, intent wording, filer side, lead-document variants, requirement labels, linked interview/form/help versions, local supplements, authoritative sources, content/technical owners, approver/date/scope and next review. Review both sides and child/adult or other lead variants in staging. Recheck when forms, local rules or court case/filing names change. HTTP link dates are separate from substantive approval. The Illinois starter guides are pending partner review; Massachusetts/Vermont finder coverage is not populated.