Verify Vermont return filing through general LITEfile alongside the guided-interview launch #368

Partner requirement

Source: Kris's Vermont LITEfile testing feedback dated October 27, 2026, supplied for triage. She manually started a new Relief from Abuse case with four forms (not an interview handoff) and tested a Small Claims Complaint.

Reviewed main at 8aa288b456e2079099a90b9d6bd87194e90269e9. This is source/history review, not a reproduction of Kris's deployed session; the referenced screenshots were not included in the supplied text.

Kris clarifies the intended Vermont offering: begin with guided-interview → LITEfile, but retain general LITEfile so the same self-represented users can return to file additional papers in their cases.

Current implementation and scope

General manual filing and an existing-case workflow already exist; this is a Vermont launch/continuity acceptance task, not a request to implement an entire second product.

• Implement guided-interview filing handoffs #225/Streamline interview handoff review and continuation #355 implement and streamline interview handoff; RC1: verify one complete Vermont Docassemble-to-LITEFile filing #166 still owns verification of one complete Vermont interview-to-test-filing path.
• Simplify the path to a confirmed existing court case #307/Find filing types within a confirmed existing case #309/Resolve provisional AI suggestions against the confirmed case #310 and Preserve existing-case parties through fees and submission #299 implement confirmed-case routing, scoped subsequent filing choices and preservation of court parties.
• Allow locking down LITEFile to specific Docassemble interview handoffs #226 is an open proposal for configurable interview-only lockdown, motivated by possible other-jurisdiction needs. Do not apply such a restriction to Vermont in a way that blocks this approved return-filer scenario.
• Documentation for SRLs: step-by-step guides for the whole filing workflow #357 owns user task guides and Missing feature: service contacts in Tyler #356 owns missing Tyler service-contact management.

Acceptance criteria

• Record Vermont's approved launch scope for both the guided first-filing route and direct subsequent filing; keep the general entry point discoverable.
• In the intended test environment, verify returning after the first case is created/accepted, signing in, choosing an existing case, locating the correct court/case, and filing an additional supported document.
• Include an RFA case where permitted and address masked/confidential case lookup with the correct authorized court identifiers. Do not promise access before a case exists or bypass court access restrictions.
• Reuse the confirmed court/category/type and existing parties; retain subsequent-only filing choices and allow correction by selecting the proper case.
• Verify the appropriate later-filing fee/exemption and prior-waiver guidance without assuming that a saved payment account proves a waiver.
• Document the exact path back into the case and any needed external service/contact steps. General LITEfile availability does not itself supply all service features.
• Link sanitized acceptance evidence and remaining limitations to RC1: verify one complete Vermont Docassemble-to-LITEFile filing #166/RC1: complete launch testing matrix and accessibility signoff #200 and the relevant Documentation for SRLs: step-by-step guides for the whole filing workflow #357 guides.

Policy question to resolve with Judiciary

Rule 3(d) generally requires continuing electronic filing after an SRL starts, but includes a Guide and File exception and a court-approved discontinuance path. Confirm whether VTCourtForms → LITEfile falls within that defined exception. The utility of general return filing remains; do not justify the UI with an unqualified legal claim that every guided user is compelled to continue electronically.

Related October-feedback tasks: #363 (per-document lookup), #364 (new-case county/search symptoms), #367 (fee guidance).