Legal AI automation for the first pass, with attorneys making the call.

Legal AI automation is software that does the first pass on legal reading and drafting, then hands the result to an attorney to check. Examples are contract review and clause extraction, summaries of medical records and depositions, first drafts of letters and discovery responses, and answering questions over a firm's past work. Legal workflow automation software does a different job: it moves tasks and data between systems. Every AI output we build cites its source so the attorney can verify it.

AI handles first passes: reviewing documents for specific clauses, summarizing records and transcripts, drafting routine documents and finding prior work product. It does not give legal advice, decide strategy or file anything. AI for legal document review works best when the attorney defines what to look for, so we start from your checklist and test against documents your team has already reviewed. Anything uncertain goes to a person.

It can be built to support those obligations, but the obligations stay with the firm. Our builds never train models on client data, limit access by matter and user, keep data in the firm's own environment where possible, encrypt it in transit and at rest, and log every access. An attorney reviews every output. Whether a given use meets your jurisdiction's ethics rules is for your firm and its ethics counsel to decide, and we document how the system works so they can.

Often, yes, depending on the system and your plan. Clio publishes an API. MyCase, PracticePanther, NetDocuments and iManage each control API access in their own way, through plan tiers or partner programs. During scoping we check API access, plan limits and any partner requirements, and tell you before quoting if a connection is limited. For document review work, a reliable export from your DMS is sometimes enough.

It depends on how many tasks are in scope, how much attorney judgement the AI has to replicate, your document volume, and whether your systems have usable APIs. The AI audit is free and ends with a scoped estimate. Builds are fixed-price against that scope, and ongoing support is a flat monthly fee covering hosting, monitoring, model and API costs, fixes and improvement. We do not bill hourly. Our pricing page explains what moves the number.

Partly. Routing a new inquiry into a conflict check and a new matter is workflow automation. The AI part is reading what a prospective client wrote or said, summarizing the facts and suggesting the practice area and attorney it fits. For status updates, AI can draft a plain-language summary of recent matter activity for the attorney to approve before it goes out. A person decides on every new engagement and approves every client message.

No. The AI does the first read and the first draft. Paralegals and associates check it, correct it and apply judgement, and attorneys stay responsible for the work. The aim is to move their time away from typing summaries and hunting for clauses, toward the analysis and client work that needs a trained person.

Most builds go live in two to three weeks from a defined scope. Work that needs access to a restricted DMS, or testing against documents your team has already reviewed, can take longer, which is why we scope before we quote. We usually start with one task, such as first-pass review for one document type, prove it on real matters, and then add the next.

Return comes from attorney and paralegal hours moved off first-pass reading and drafting, and from faster turnaround on review work. How it shows up depends on how you bill: on flat-fee or contingency matters it lowers the cost of doing the work, and on hourly matters it frees capacity. The free audit measures your current process first, so any estimate uses your numbers rather than an industry average.