Client intake
Every enquiry answered immediately, conflict-checked, qualified against your matter criteria, and routed to the right practice group with a briefing. Out of hours included.
AI agents for law firms
Straight answer: legal AI has moved from experimental to production. The problem with generic tools is specificity — they don’t know your preferred indemnification language, which clauses your insurance practice always flags, or your client-specific playbooks. Lawyers try them, get output they can’t trust, and revert to doing it manually.
Last updated:
Where firms lose money
Intake. Marketing spend converts into a voicemail nobody returns, an intake form asking fifteen questions before earning any trust, and a prospective client quietly calling the next firm on their list.
Regulatory tracking. Monitoring changes across federal, state and industry bodies eats 10–20 hours a month per firm, and a missed update is direct errors-and-omissions exposure.
Document review at volume, where the first pass is mechanical and the judgement is in the exceptions.
Workflows we automate
Document and contract review
First-pass review against your playbooks and preferred positions, flagging deviations rather than summarising the obvious.
Regulatory change monitoring
Changes tracked across the bodies relevant to your practice areas, with alerts routed to the right practice group.
Matter administration
Document chasing, deadline tracking, file completeness.
Billing narrative preparation
Time entries drafted from actual activity, for review and correction rather than reconstruction.
What we integrate with
- Practice management: major legal PM platforms with API access
- Document management: iManage, NetDocuments, SharePoint
- Court and filing systems: where APIs exist
- CRM and intake: existing intake platforms
How we de-risk it
- No legal advice, ever. Agents handle intake, administration and first-pass review. Advice is a lawyer’s, without exception.
- Conflict checking is blocking, and errs toward escalation.
- Privilege and confidentiality protected through your infrastructure, your access controls, no external data movement.
- Every flag is reviewable with reasoning attached, because a black-box document review is unusable in a professional context.
Related use cases
The same workflows, described by the job rather than the sector.
Frequently asked questions
Is this Harvey or similar?
Different layer. Legal-vertical products lead on contract analysis accuracy benchmarks. We build the firm-specific intake, administration and workflow layer around whatever review tooling you use.
What about professional obligations and supervision?
Agents are tools under a lawyer’s supervision, and we build supervision points in explicitly. Your regulator’s guidance on AI use should shape the design — bring it to the audit.
Will it know our clause preferences?
That’s the entire point. Generic tools are trained broadly; a custom agent is built against your playbooks.
How does this handle privilege?
Everything runs in your infrastructure under your controls. Nothing goes to an external processor without your explicit configuration.
Not sure this is your operation
Every sector page describes the workflows we’d expect to find. Yours will differ in ways that matter, and the audit is designed for exactly that — you get evidence about your own business rather than someone else’s.