It is not enough for the paralegal to simply begin gathering information. To conduct an effective and useful investigation, the paralegal must first establish the goals of the investigation. The goals of the investigation allow the paralegal to design an investigation plan to sort, filter, and evaluate the information received in an investigation. Only that information that is relevant to the client's legal problem is useful.

Establishing the Goals of the Investigation

The broad goal of an investigation is often contained in the assignment itself. The paralegal is told to conduct an investigation into possible intestate heirs in a probate case, to examine financial records for evidence of financial mismanagement in a minority shareholder suit, or to find other instances of product failure in a product liability case. These broad goals of an assignment help establish the parameters of the investigation, but they do not provide much focus to the investigation.

To focus the investigation requires an understanding of the context of the investigation. This requires a thorough review of the file materials and the legal result the client seeks. When setting the goals of the investigation, the paralegal should answer three questions:

• Why is this information important to the client's case?

• How will this information be used to advance the client's case?

• How does this information fit with other information about the client's case?

Knowing these three goals allows the paralegal to develop an efficient and effective investigation plan.

Developing the Investigation Plan

Designing an effective and efficient investigation plan begins with preparing a series of questions that must be answered to achieve the goals of the investigation. A complete set of questions can be prepared by conducting a thorough analysis of the factual information known at the time of the assignment.

First, prepare a list of the elements of the claim, issue, or topic to be investigated. These elements can be located in a complaint, an applicable statute, a form book, or an office checklist. The elements are the minimum amount of information necessary to achieve the goal of the investigation.

Second, review the file to determine the known facts. Many of these facts will fit the elements; some will not. Some facts may even contradict the elements. Make a note of all facts and where they fit.

Third, determine if there is any question about the reliability of any of the known facts. No matter how evident, the reliability of facts should not be taken at face value. If there is a way to verify the reliability of the known facts, that step should be included in the investigation.

Fourth, based on the list of the elements and the known facts, compile a list of facts that you do not know. These facts should be related to an element of the case. Unknown facts that are not related to an element of the case are usually not relevant. At the very least, they are not the primary focus of the investigation.

Fifth, beside each unknown fact make a note of where that information might be found. Do not limit yourself to the most likely place the information will be found, but list as many possible sources of the information as you can think of. Possible sources of information include government agencies, business records, trade associations, and other public sources, as well as witnesses specific to the case.

Finally, determine the best way to obtain the needed facts. There are many choices. Formal discovery procedures may be required if the information is in the hands of the opponent; informal procedures may be appropriate if the information is public or in the hands of an independent witness. The best way of obtaining the information may not be the most convenient way. The approach to investigation must be cost-effective while assuring the reliability of the information.