Legal Matter AI
Upload a matter's documents and every passage of every one of them is read — the AI does not choose what to look at and does not stop early. It then extracts the facts, surfaces potential legal issues, weighs the supporting AND contradictory evidence, and drafts a source-cited report. An AI critic reviews the analysis first, and nothing is written until a supervising attorney approves it.
Your data: Matter documents are kept for the life of the matter, encrypted with your firm's own key. They are deleted when you delete them — never on a timer.
Available to every firm the moment you sign up. Create your practice, open a matter, add documents — there is no waitlist and nothing to enable.
The six agents, and what each one actually does
Not one model asked to do everything. Six with narrow jobs, because a single agent that reads, analyses, argues and writes does all four badly — and there is nothing left to check its work. The first one reads every passage you selected, in full; it does not search, and it cannot skip.
- 1
Matter Reader
The only agent that touches your documents. It reads every passage you selected, in full — it does not search, and it has no way to skip. What it read is reported back to you as a count you can check against your file.
- 2
Fact Analyst
Extraction only, no conclusions: parties, dates, events, obligations, what the documents agree on, what they contradict each other about, and the questions the documents do not answer.
- 3
Legal Issue Analyst
Surfaces potential issues, each with what in the documents raises it. Where the matter carries a recognised case type, it also weighs each element the claim commonly requires against the record.
- 4
Evidence & Gap Analyst
Weighs each issue both ways — what supports it, what contradicts it, what is missing that would resolve it. The contradictory side is the point: an analysis that only builds your case surprises you later.
- 5
AI Critic
Reviews the analysis before you see it and grades every objection: material — it says something the record does not support — or refinement, true but sharpenable. Only a material objection withholds approval.
- 6
Writer
Runs only after you approve, and composes rather than analyses. It adds no fact that is not already in the approved analysis, and no fact without the citation it already carried.
Nothing decides what runs next except code
The supervisor that routes between agents is not a language model. Has the critic approved? Is the iteration budget spent? What did the attorney decide? Every one of those is a value to read, not a judgment call — and putting the loop guard, the thing that stops runaway spending, inside a model would make it something you can talk out of stopping.
The critic can send the analysis back for more research once. At the ceiling the run goes to the attorney anyway, carrying the unresolved critique, because throwing away the work would help nobody. Two passes is the whole budget — an analysis that cannot be made sound in two is telling you something about the record, not asking for a third.
The attorney gate is a real stop
When the analysis reaches review, the run halts and is written to storage. Nothing polls, nothing holds a connection open, and no cost accrues while it waits — it can sit for days. Resuming it needs the ai.approve permission, checked server-side before the run is touched, so it is a control and not a hidden button.
The reviewer sees the analysis, the critic’s verdict, and whether the critic actually approved it or the run simply ran out of passes. Approve and the writer runs. Request changes and it goes back to research carrying your comments. An unrecognised answer counts as requesting changes, never as approval.
What you get
One report, with these sections, in this order, every time — so you always know where to look, and what is missing is impossible to hide. There is no format to choose: a lawyer opening a file does not yet know whether the chronology or the missing element will turn out to be the point, so the report carries all of it.
- Executive Summary
- Response To Your Request
- Key Facts
- Chronology
- Parties And Roles
- Potential Legal Issues
- Element Coverage
- Supporting Evidence
- Contradictory Evidence
- Evidence Gaps
- Questions To Ask
- Suggested Draft Language
- Attorney Review Notes
- Record Examined
- Source References
Every factual statement carries an inline citation — [Document name, p.12, §8.2] — and dates appear exactly as the document states them, never normalised or inferred. Contradictory Evidence is never omitted; if none was found, the report says so in as many words.
Delivered as a document, not a chat log
Rendered to PDF and DOCX and stored beside the matter’s other documents, carrying:
- A provenance block — the matter, the run, the attorney who approved it and when. A PDF outlives the session that made it, so it has to explain itself on its own.
- A SHA-256 hash — recorded alongside the file, so the report can be shown later to be unaltered. The same integrity guarantee the evidence extractor gives; the newer tool does not get a weaker one.
- The disclaimer, in the document — AI-assisted attorney work product requiring professional review. Not legal advice.
What it will not do
Worth as much as the feature list. A tool that is vague here is asking you to find its limits in front of a judge.
It cannot look outside the matter
Each matter has its own index. The agents search that one and have no way to name another — not another matter of yours, and certainly not another firm's. It is a boundary in the plumbing, not an instruction in a prompt.
It does not research case law
There is no external legal corpus behind it. Everything it says comes from documents you put in the matter. Case-law research is a separate tool on the roadmap, and conflating the two would let it cite authority it has never read.
It does not give legal advice
The output is draft attorney work product requiring professional review. The prompts, the data structures and the report itself all use tentative language deliberately — 'potential issue', 'considerations', 'matters requiring attorney judgment'.
It cannot finish without you
There is no autonomous mode, no scheduled run that files itself, and no configuration that skips the attorney gate. If nobody with approval authority reviews it, no report is ever written.
What it costs
An analysis is priced by the size of the matter you select, not by how much the AI happens to write — so you know the figure before you start. Your firm holds a prepaid credit balance rather than a subscription, and each analysis draws down its price.
| Matter size | Price per analysis |
|---|---|
| Up to 50 pages | $49.99 |
| 51 to 150 pages | $99.99 |
| 151 to 350 pages | $199.99 |
Before a run starts you see the price and your available balance, and you approve it. If you send the analysis back for changes, the second pass costs nothing — we would rather you ask for a better answer than weigh it against the cost. A second report in another language is 50% of the analysis price.
Starter
$199.99
$199.99 of credit
about 3 ordinary matters, added and analysed
up to a 150-page matter
Enough for a few ordinary matters, start to finish.
Practice
$499.99
$549.99 of credit
+10% free
about 10 ordinary matters, added and analysed
up to a 350-page matter
10% more credit included. Sized for a firm running analyses every week.
Firm
$1,499.99
$1,874.99 of credit
+25% free
about 37 ordinary matters, added and analysed
up to a 350-page matter
25% more credit included. For a litigation practice running matters continuously.
An analysis is priced by the size of the matter you select, not by how much the AI happens to write. A 50-page matter is one price, known before you start. Uploading documents is charged separately, per page, and a second report in another language is half the analysis price.
Documents you can order from an analysis
Once you have approved an analysis, the work is already done and reviewed — the facts, the chronology, the parties, the issues and every citation. These re-present it as the documents a litigator actually files, which is why each costs a fraction of the analysis rather than a fee of its own. You order them at the approval screen, you are charged only for what is delivered, and each arrives as a Word document so you can cut, rewrite and renumber before it goes out under your signature.
| Document | Share | On a 50-page matter | On a 350-page matter |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chronology exhibitThe dated sequence of events, formatted as an exhibit with citations. | 25% | $12.50 | $50.00 |
| Privilege-log starterA log skeleton listing each document, its date, author and basis for withholding. | 25% | $12.50 | $50.00 |
| Settlement-conference summaryA condensed statement of the facts, the issues and the evidence both ways. | 25% | $12.50 | $50.00 |
| Deposition outlineTopics and questions per witness, each anchored to the document that raises it. | 50% | $25.00 | $100.00 |
| Demand letter skeletonThe factual narrative and the supported claims, as a drafting starting point. | 50% | $25.00 | $100.00 |
| InterrogatoriesQuestions drafted against the elements the record does not yet establish. | 50% | $25.00 | $100.00 |
| Requests for productionDocument requests aimed at the gaps the analysis identified. | 50% | $25.00 | $100.00 |
| Requests for admissionAdmissions sought on facts the record already supports. | 50% | $25.00 | $100.00 |
Every one of them is a draft for you to finish
Each opens with a notice saying so, and nothing is ever filed or served by us. No dollar figure, deadline, case number, court or signature block is invented — those arrive as marked placeholders, because a plausible invented value is the one thing in a filing nobody checks. Every assertion carries the same citation it carried in the analysis, and nothing appears that the analysis you approved did not already say.
Credits never expire
They carry forward month to month for as long as your account is open. No monthly minimum, nothing forfeited at the end of a period. Purchases are non-refundable.
A rejected run is not a wasted one
Send an analysis back and it re-researches; the writer only ever runs once, after you approve.
Built around your kind of case
Label a matter with its case type and the report checks every element the claim has to make out — telling you which ones your documents support, and which they do not. See the case types. Matters without one get the full analysis exactly as normal.
Adding documents is priced too
Bringing a document into a matter costs $0.0035 a page — 35 cents per 100 pages — charged once, however many times you analyse it afterwards. A scanned exhibit also needs OCR at $0.0045 a page (45 cents per 100 pages). Both appear on the same ledger, quoted and confirmed before anything is processed.
Your firm owner sees every credit spent, itemised by agent and by run, with the rate that was applied — so any charge can be explained. Deleting a matter destroys its documents and analyses but keeps that billing record, marked as deleted, so an invoice never refers to something that has vanished.
Open your first matter today
Create your practice, add the documents, and run an analysis — you approve the estimated cost before anything runs, and an attorney approves the result before anything is written.