Research

Judgment research starts with a vague recollection and a blank search bar.

Search a bounded corpus of judgments and surface similar cases. Read plain-language summaries with verified citations.

The problem

Judgment research starts with a vague recollection and a blank search bar.

Associates spend a day reconstructing what the firm already knew.

The outcome

Research starts from a bounded corpus, with similar-case suggestions and plain-language summaries. The advocate confirms every citation.

Modules

Modules in the research step.

Each module contributes data, drafts, or controls to this step.

Judgment Research

Full-text search over a bounded judgment corpus with similar-case suggestions and plain-language summaries. Citations are flagged for the advocate to confirm.

How it works

How it works.

1
Search the bounded corpus
Full-text search runs over a bounded judgment corpus the firm can scope, not the open web.
2
Suggest similar cases
Similar-case suggestions surface judgments that bear on the same question, so the associate does not start from a blank bar.
3
Summarize in plain language
Plain-language summaries give the associate the holding, the reasoning, and the caveats without a full read.
4
Flag for verification
Summaries are derived, not certified. Citations are flagged as unverified. The associate confirms them before relying on them.

Benefits

Benefits.

Research starts from a bounded corpus, not the open web.
Similar-case suggestions give the associate a starting point, not a blank bar.
Plain-language summaries save the associate a full read.
Citations are flagged for verification. The associate confirms them, not trusts them.

Trust layer

Judgment research runs over a bounded corpus the firm can scope. Summaries are derived, not certified. Citations are flagged for the advocate to confirm.

Read the security page

The workflow