Review a deadline after its inputs change

Before you begin

• The existing confirmed deadline and the changed source or matter record.

What to do

1. Open the review item and identify the existing confirmed date. Read which input changed and inspect the underlying record. BRON proposes a recalculated date; it does not move the previously confirmed deadline by itself.
2. Compare the old basis with the new one. Check the trigger, service method, forum and cited authority against the source material. Establish whether the changed record reflects a real correction or an entry that itself needs to be corrected.
3. Have a licensed attorney decide what the change means for the deadline. Continue working to the currently confirmed date while that decision is pending. A new suggestion is not authority to stop preparing for the existing calendar entry.
4. Use the deadline's review and confirmation flow for counsel's decision. Inspect the exact date and basis before approving a change. If the revised facts still cannot be resolved, retain the issue as pending work and use the firm's deadline escalation process.
5. After the decision, reopen the deadline and check the recorded result. Review any external calendar copies your team uses, including earlier .ics exports. A downloaded calendar file does not update itself when the matter record changes.

What you should see

Counsel has reviewed the changed basis, the matter reflects the resulting decision, and the team has checked any separate calendar copies it relies on.

Limits and unresolved problems

A changed input produces a proposal for attorney review, never an automatic move. Supported-rule limits still apply. If the review cannot load or save, treat the outcome as unresolved and check the matter before retrying.

Product scope and requirements

• Changed inputs and recalculation

Related guides

• Distinguish a proposed date from a confirmed deadline
• Calculate a date and review it before calendaring
• Resolve a missing rule or conflicting deadline basis