Terry emailed about a bug -
> We assisted a pro se today at court. Pro se was holmesdina@gmail.com
>
> She got through 90% of the interview (for Rent and Possession Answer & ADs, Motion for Leave, and Discovery), reviewed her answers, and we reached a page asking for "the date tenant hired you" or similar...as if an attorney was completing the interview, not a pro se.
>
> There was no way around this page. She couldn't complete documents, and couldn't go back to fix it. I added a message on the comment bubble of that page, it should be in your logs.
>
> Bottom line: interview broke completely, and we don't know why.
>
> Is there any chance you can figure this out in time for this lady to complete her documents?
>
>
> We never developed anything for attorneys to use the tool. Why was that last question even part of the interview?
Because a motion to shorten time was appropriate, the interview tried to define counsel_retained, which was conditioned on users[0].attorney.there_are_any. However, users[0].attorney uses .target_number. I changed this condition of counsel_retained to the target_number (which will make it more likely the client can complete the interview from her saved answers).
There was an additional problem - the review block was setting users[0].attorney.there_are_any to true. I removed the edit field in the review block for users[0].attorney[0].name.first. I think we should use a table, but I just left it out for now, since Terry wants to prioritize getting the issue fixed for the client.
### In this PR, I have:
* [x] Manually tested to ensure my PR is working
* [ ] Ensured issues that this PR closes will be [automatically closed](https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue)
* [x] Requested review from Mia or Quinten
* [ ] Ensured automated tests are passing
* [ ] Updated automated tests so they are now passing
* [ ] There were no automated tests on this repo so I filled out [this interview](https://apps-dev.suffolklitlab.org/run/test-setup/) and there is now an "it runs" test
…number to define counsel_retained