Eviction defense intake burns more staff time per signed case than almost any other practice area a firm runs. The callers are real, the urgency is real, and the window to act is genuinely short. The problem is that a large share of eviction defense callers cannot pay a retainer, have a hearing the day after tomorrow, or have a fact pattern that leaves no viable defense. Without a structured qualifying sequence, intake staff spend thirty minutes on a call that was never going to sign.
The seven questions below are designed to move fast, gather the facts that matter, and give intake managers a decision point before a consult is scheduled. They are framed for the firm, not the caller.
Quick answer:
- Ask for the court date and type of eviction notice received.
- Confirm which county or jurisdiction the case is filed in.
- Ask whether rent is current or in arrears and by how long.
- Screen for habitability or retaliation claims early.
- Confirm ability to cover a retainer before the hearing date.
- Ask about prior eviction history on the same lease.
- Flag cases that need an emergency stay before next business day.
1. Ask for the Court Date and Type of Eviction Notice Received
The notice type and any pending court date determine whether a firm can act in time, which is why they belong at the top of every eviction defense intake call.
The notice type tells intake staff what the case is actually about: a pay-or-quit notice signals a nonpayment dispute, a cure-or-quit notice signals a lease violation, and an unconditional quit notice often signals a landlord who believes no defense is available. Each type carries a different set of potential defenses, and each one comes with its own statutory timeline that varies by state. A caller who cannot identify the notice they received, or who received it more than a week ago and has not acted, is a signal that the matter may already be in a posture where intervention is difficult.
The court date is the harder filter. If a hearing is already scheduled, every subsequent question gets answered against that deadline. If the caller does not know whether a court date exists, intake staff should ask directly whether they have received any paperwork from a court, not just from the landlord.
Practical takeaway: Build two intake fields in your CRM for this question: notice type (dropdown) and hearing date (date field). If the hearing date is within five business days, route the record to a priority queue before the call ends.
2. Confirm Which County or Jurisdiction the Case Is Filed in
Eviction law is jurisdiction-specific, so confirming the county or court where the case is filed is a prerequisite before intake staff can assess whether the firm can represent the caller at all.
This is not a formality. Unlawful detainer procedures differ by state, and within states they often differ by county. California's eviction statutes, for example, include local tenant protection ordinances that apply only in specific cities and counties, meaning a defense available in Los Angeles may not exist in an adjacent jurisdiction. States with landlord-tenant courts separate from general civil courts add another layer: the firm must practice in the correct venue.
Intake staff who skip this question sometimes schedule consults for callers in counties the firm does not serve, or research defenses that the applicable local ordinance does not support. Confirming jurisdiction in the first two minutes prevents both outcomes.
Practical takeaway: Map the firm's service counties in the CRM as a dropdown. If the caller names a county outside the firm's footprint, the intake script should route to a referral protocol immediately rather than continuing the qualification sequence.
3. Ask Whether Rent Is Current or in Arrears and by How Long
The arrears amount and duration are among the most direct signals of both defense viability and retainer collectability.
A nonpayment case where the tenant has one missed month, a documented reason for the gap (a banking error, a delayed paycheck), and current funds available is a different case than one where the tenant is six months behind with no payment source. Both callers are in eviction proceedings. Only one is a realistic candidate for a retainer-based defense.
The arrears question also opens the door to fact-gathering that shapes strategy. Partial payment history matters: if the landlord accepted partial rent after the notice was served, that can affect the notice's validity under the laws of some states, though the specific legal standard varies by jurisdiction. Intake staff do not need to know the law to ask the question. They need to record the answer so the attorney who reviews the record can make that call.
Practical takeaway: Ask two sub-questions: how many months of rent are owed, and whether any payments have been made since the notice was served. Record both as discrete CRM fields rather than a note, so the data can be used to filter the pipeline by case type.
4. Screen for Habitability or Retaliation Claims Early
A habitability defect or a retaliation timeline can convert a weak nonpayment case into a defensible one, and sometimes into a counterclaim, but only if intake surfaces these facts before the consult.
Many eviction defense callers present as straightforward nonpayment cases. A share of them have also made written repair requests that the landlord ignored, reported code violations to a government agency, or organized other tenants in the building. Under the laws of many states, an eviction filed within a defined window after one of these protected actions creates a rebuttable presumption of retaliation, which can defeat the eviction and, in some jurisdictions, support a damages claim. The specific window and the statutory basis vary by state.
Habitability defenses operate on a similar logic. A tenant living in a unit with documented, uninhabitable conditions may have a defense rooted in the implied warranty of habitability, depending on the jurisdiction, that affects both the eviction and any rent owed.
Intake staff do not screen for these defenses to give legal advice. They screen to flag the record as "possible affirmative defense" so the reviewing attorney does not walk into a consult cold.
Practical takeaway: Add two yes-or-no fields to the intake form: "Has the caller made any written repair requests or code complaints?" and "Has any rent been withheld or reduced because of unit conditions?" A yes on either should flag the record for attorney review before the consult is confirmed.
5. Confirm Ability to Cover a Retainer Before the Hearing Date
The gap between the caller's court date and the retainer conversation is the most reliable early filter in eviction defense intake.
This question is uncomfortable for intake staff who are trained to be helpful, and it is the question most likely to be softened or delayed until the end of a call. Moving it earlier is not aggressive; it is honest. An eviction defense retainer cannot be collected after a lockout has been executed. A hearing cannot be continued to give a new client time to pay unless the attorney is already of record. The logistics of fee-based representation in eviction defense are tighter than in almost any other practice area.
The question is not whether the caller has funds. The question is whether the caller can arrange a retainer before the hearing date. Those are different. A caller with a hearing in four days who can pay today is a viable client. A caller with a hearing in two days who needs a week to gather funds is not, regardless of case merit, unless the firm has a specific emergency-retainer protocol already in place.
Practical takeaway: Train intake staff to ask: "If we move forward, our fee would need to be arranged before your court date. Is that something you can do?" Record the response as a pipeline qualifier, not a note. Cases where the caller cannot confirm retainer timing before the hearing should be flagged, not scheduled for a standard consult.
6. Ask About Prior Eviction History on the Same Lease
A second or third eviction action on the same lease, or a prior unlawful detainer judgment against the same tenant in the same unit, narrows the available defenses and signals case complexity that the firm should understand before scheduling a consult.
Repeated nonpayment actions on the same lease sometimes indicate a pattern that limits the procedural defenses available. Prior judgments may affect the tenant's ability to remain in the unit even if the current action is successfully defended. In jurisdictions with tenant opportunity-to-cure protections, the number of prior notices or actions can affect whether the current notice is valid. None of these points require intake staff to make a legal determination. They require intake staff to record the facts so the attorney can.
Prior eviction history also carries a practical retainer-collectability signal. A caller who has been through multiple eviction proceedings in the same tenancy has experience with the process, which can mean either a more sophisticated client or one who has learned that initiating an intake call delays proceedings without a commitment to retain.
Practical takeaway: Ask directly: "Has your landlord filed to evict you before in this same unit?" If yes, ask how it was resolved. Record both answers in the CRM record as discrete fields. Cases with prior filings should carry a note for the reviewing attorney before the consult.
7. Flag Cases That Need an Emergency Stay Before Next Business Day
Cases requiring an emergency stay before the next business day need a separate flagging protocol at intake, not a place in the standard callback queue.
A caller who contacts the firm the evening before a scheduled lockout, a writ of possession execution, or a same-day hearing is not a standard intake case. They are a triage case. The window for filing a motion for an emergency stay or appearing in court the following morning is measured in hours, not days. Standard callback queues, next-morning consult scheduling, and email-based intake forms are not built for this scenario.
Firms that handle eviction defense regularly encounter these callers. The question is whether the intake system can identify them at the moment of contact and route them to someone with authority to act, or whether they go to a callback queue and call the firm down the street.
A flagging protocol for emergency cases does not have to be complicated. It requires two things: an intake question that surfaces the timeline ("Is there a court date or a scheduled lockout within the next 24 hours?"), and a routing path that reaches a decision-maker in the firm rather than a general voicemail.
Practical takeaway: Add an emergency-flag field to the intake CRM record. Define the trigger: a court date or lockout within 24 hours, confirmed on the call. Route flagged records to a named attorney or paralegal by text alert, not by a callback queue. The AI lead response system can handle after-hours triage and flag these records automatically so a human sees them before the next business day opens.
Putting the Sequence Together
These seven questions are not a script. They are a decision tree. The answer to question one (notice type and court date) determines how urgently every subsequent question needs to be resolved. The answer to question five (retainer timing) determines whether a consult is worth scheduling at all. The answer to question seven determines whether the call needs to be escalated before it ends.
The questions work as a filter because they surface the cases that are worth the firm's time, before a thirty-minute consult is scheduled, before an attorney prepares, and before intake staff spend their capacity on a caller who cannot retain. That is the function of intake in eviction defense: not to screen out everyone, but to identify, quickly, which callers can become signed cases.
Firms that connect this intake sequence to a CRM pipeline built around case stages can run that filter at scale. Every answer becomes a field. Every field becomes a filter. The pipeline shows, by case type and by intake question, where qualified leads are converting and where they are not.
For a firm ready to build that system, or to review how its current intake is performing against a structured qualifying sequence, a Case Acquisition Review pulls the relevant numbers in thirty minutes and maps the gaps.
Frequently Asked Questions
What questions should intake staff ask eviction defense callers?
Intake staff should ask for the notice type and court date, confirm the county or jurisdiction, determine whether rent is in arrears and by how much, screen for habitability or retaliation facts, confirm the caller's ability to arrange a retainer before the hearing date, ask about prior eviction history on the same lease, and flag cases requiring emergency action within 24 hours. These seven questions, asked in order, surface the facts that determine case viability and retainer collectability before a consult is scheduled.
How do firms screen eviction cases before scheduling consults?
Most eviction defense firms use a structured intake call that collects the notice type, the court date, the arrears amount, and the caller's payment capacity before routing to a consult. Firms with higher case volume add a CRM intake form that records each answer as a discrete field, allowing the pipeline to be filtered by case type, hearing urgency, and retainer viability. The screening step exists to protect attorney time and intake capacity from callers who cannot become signed cases.
What disqualifies a tenant case from eviction defense representation?
The most common disqualifiers in eviction defense intake are a hearing date too close to allow retainer collection, an arrears amount that suggests no realistic ability to pay, a jurisdiction the firm does not serve, and prior judgments that leave no viable defense. None of these disqualifiers are absolute, but each one requires the firm to have a clear protocol: either an alternative path (payment plan, referral, limited-scope representation) or a defined script for declining representation.
Why does the notice type matter at intake?
The notice type determines the legal theory the eviction is based on, which directly shapes the available defenses. A pay-or-quit notice opens different defense questions than a cure-or-quit or an unconditional quit notice. The notice type also carries a statutory deadline, which varies by state, that determines how much time the tenant had to respond and whether that window has already closed. Intake staff do not need to know eviction law to ask for the notice type; they need to record it so the reviewing attorney can assess it.
Should intake staff ask about habitability on every eviction call?
Yes. Habitability and retaliation defenses are underreported at intake because callers do not frame their situation in legal terms. A caller describing mold, a broken heating system, or a landlord who filed to evict shortly after the caller complained to a code enforcement agency is describing a potential defense or counterclaim. Intake staff who ask directly about repair requests and their timing surface these facts routinely, rather than waiting for them to emerge during a consult.
How should a firm handle after-hours eviction emergency calls?
After-hours eviction emergency calls, specifically callers facing a lockout or a court date within the next 24 hours, need a routing path that reaches a decision-maker, not a general voicemail. An automated intake system can collect the caller's notice type, court date, and contact information after hours and trigger an alert to a named attorney or paralegal by text. Without that routing protocol, the firm's capacity to file emergency motions goes unused because no one with authority saw the record until the window had closed.
Can an intake call be too short for eviction defense cases?
Yes. Eviction defense is more fact-intensive at intake than case types where the core qualifying question is straightforward. A caller's notice type, arrears history, habitability facts, prior eviction history, and retainer capacity are each a separate qualifying question. Intake calls that are shortened to reduce staff time often skip the habitability and retaliation screening, which means the firm misses defensible cases that look like weak nonpayment cases on the surface. A structured seven-question sequence typically takes eight to twelve minutes and is faster than a thirty-minute consult that ends without a retainer.
What CRM fields should eviction defense firms build for intake?
At a minimum: notice type, court or hearing date, county and jurisdiction, months of arrears, any payments made after notice was served, habitability complaint flag, retaliation flag, prior eviction history on the same lease, retainer timing confirmation, and emergency-stay flag. Each of these should be a discrete field, not a note, so the pipeline can be filtered and the firm can measure which intake answers correlate with signed cases over time.