How to write time entries: legal billing examples

The formula for how to write time entries is a specific action verb, its subject and its purpose or result. Each narrative describes one task, with the correct client, matter and duration alongside it. The client should understand the charge without asking for an explanation, while confidential advice stays out of the narrative.

One formula explains how to write time entries

A useful billing narrative follows this formula: action verb + object + purpose or result. For example: “Revised draft defence to address limitation issue (0.6).”

A task description should fit one or two lines and use a consistent tense. Unfinished work can still have a clear purpose. All examples here are invented; durations are in hours, using tenths of an hour. Emory University's guidelines require six-minute increments.

The date, timekeeper, client and matter sit alongside the narrative and duration. The engagement's agreed increment and rounding method govern the bill.

For e-billing, entries may also need UTBMS task codes and activity codes. The LEDES Oversight Committee publishes activity codes; the firm should confirm the client's chosen set.

A clear narrative starts with a record of the work. Sixminute provides automatic time capture across the working day and writes one entry per task, already matched to its client and matter.

Separate tasks let clients assess each charge

Separate entries show how much time each task took, so clients can assess each charge. Block billing combines distinct tasks under one duration, hiding that allocation. Blackstone's outside counsel policy rejects block-billed descriptions unless previously agreed and says “incomplete or vague charge descriptions are not acceptable”.

In Welch v. Metropolitan Life (2007), the Ninth Circuit recognised courts' power to reduce block-billed hours. It vacated a blanket 20% reduction because only some hours were block billed: the reduction needed to reflect those hours.

• Bad: Review evidence, draft motion and call counsel (1.8).
• Better: Analysed witness statement for inconsistencies with disclosure (0.7).
• Better: Drafted motion to compel missing email production (0.8).
• Better: Discussed production timetable with opposing counsel (0.3).

The task durations must come from the underlying record. In Hensley v. Eckerhart (1983), the Supreme Court said fee applicants should keep records enabling courts to identify distinct claims. Both cases concern US fee awards.

“Attention to” and “work on matter” need a specific task, such as “Drafted disclosure request for missing invoices”. The examples below give “review file”, “conference” and “research” a subject and purpose.

Litigation time entry examples identify the issue

Litigation billing entries should name the document or communication and the issue addressed. The University of Rhode Island's guidelines require specific actions and subject matter. These time entry examples for lawyers show how a few extra words explain the charge.

Pleadings and motions

• Bad: Work on pleading (0.8). Better: Drafted defence paragraphs addressing alleged delivery failures (0.8).
• Bad: Review motion (0.4). Better: Reviewed opposing party's dismissal motion to identify grounds requiring response (0.4).

Discovery and evidence

• Bad: Review file (1.2). Better: Reviewed defendant's production for missing invoices requested in disclosure (1.2).
• Bad: Research (0.6). Better: Researched authorities on disclosure scope for draft application (0.6).

Hearings, correspondence and client updates

• Bad: Conference (0.3). Better: Discussed expert report timetable with opposing counsel (0.3).
• Bad: Email client (0.2). Better: Explained disclosure order and document collection deadline to client (0.2).

Legal billing descriptions should explain the task without recording the advice or strategy. Rhode Island's guidelines warn that invoices may be publicly disclosed and advise avoiding privileged content. “Analysed limitation authorities for defence” identifies the subject while omitting the assessment of success. An attorney-client privilege review should check whether even the subject reveals confidential information.

Transactional and advisory entries name the document

Transactional legal billing entries should connect the document to the clause or issue addressed. These legal billing examples follow the per-task approach in Emory's guidelines.

Corporate and M&A

• Bad: Revise agreement (0.9). Better: Revised share purchase agreement warranties to reflect agreed liability limits (0.9).
• Bad: Due diligence (0.5). Better: Analysed disclosure schedule against warranty exceptions to identify omissions (0.5).

Employment

• Bad: Draft settlement (0.7). Better: Drafted settlement agreement payment provisions reflecting negotiated instalments (0.7).
• Bad: Advice (0.4). Better: Prepared dismissal procedure advice for proposed redundancy consultation (0.4).

Real estate

• Bad: Lease work (0.6). Better: Revised lease repair covenant to reflect agreed maintenance responsibilities (0.6).
• Bad: Title review (0.5). Better: Analysed title register restrictions affecting proposed transfer (0.5).

Private client and family

• Bad: Will drafting (0.8). Better: Drafted will provisions implementing client's executor appointment instructions (0.8).
• Bad: Financial documents (0.6). Better: Analysed financial disclosure for missing pension valuations before settlement discussions (0.6).

These billing narratives must reflect the work actually done; the engagement's exclusions govern whether it can be charged.

Paralegal billing entry examples show legal work

Paralegal billing entry examples should show the legal work performed. In Missouri v. Jenkins (1989), the Supreme Court approved market-rate compensation for paralegal work in a civil-rights fee award where local practice was to bill separately. It also said purely clerical or secretarial tasks should not attract paralegal rates, whoever performs them.

• Bad: Organise file (1.0). Better: Analysed correspondence to build chronology of disputed delivery dates (1.0).
• Bad: Review records (0.8). Better: Compared medical records with pleaded injuries to identify evidential gaps (0.8).
• Bad: Work on disclosure (0.6). Better: Drafted disclosure request list addressing missing employment records (0.6).

Changing the wording does not turn filing into legal analysis. Under Emory's policy, clerical tasks are non-billable unless specifically approved. The firm should record excluded tasks as non-billable and check engagement terms before charging paralegal time.

How Sixminute writes time entries

Sixminute records the whole working day and writes one entry per task, each with its client, matter, duration and a client-ready narrative. It covers every application on the computer, phone calls through its mobile app and meetings through Outlook and Google Calendar.

Computer work produces events as a document opens or an email is answered. Sixminute's Computer Event Reconstruction (CER) reads those events to reconstruct the working day across every application, with no integrations to set up.

Work in court portals and PDF readers is covered too, so matter matching and client-ready narratives start from the work actually done across applications. Setup takes about 5 minutes because there is nothing to connect application by application. Sixminute takes no screenshots, logs no keystrokes and filters on the device; only what the timesheet needs leaves it.

Entries stay private to the lawyer, who edits and releases the right ones into the firm's existing system. Lawyers using Sixminute spend about 6 minutes a day reviewing and releasing their timesheet. In Sixminute's tests, lawyers billed 9 to 15% more hours for the same work. Further reading covers client confidentiality.

Daily review prepares entries for release

The lawyer should check each day's entries against the work recorded and outside counsel guidelines before release. In a 2017 vendor-run survey of 31 Dutch law firms, TIQ and Clocktimizer found that 12% of billable hours went unrecorded, mainly because work was forgotten.

1. Review the day's record while the work is fresh. Contemporaneous timekeeping avoids reconstructing the day from memory.
2. Give each task its own entry with a specific verb, subject and purpose or result.
3. Check client, matter, date, timekeeper and duration against the record.
4. Apply the agreed billing increments and required codes.
5. Mark excluded work as non-billable and remove privileged advice or strategy from invoice narratives, including detail that could surface in a fee dispute.

Keep the original record when correcting an entry and resolve missing detail before release.

For pre-bill review, the billing manager should compare last month's rejected entries and each write-down with this checklist, then resolve recurring problems with the timekeeper before the next bill.