Start with a question you know, follow the judgments the preview finds, and record what supports or challenges your first view. Use non-confidential examples when testing drafting.
Your matter
Your research trail
Your judgment
Start with a question you know
Ask about a familiar issue, inspect the available cases, and notice what the preview misses. Drafting can help you explore an outline, but it is not yet reliable for client or court work.
Matter outline
Research note v2
Issue identified
Authority needed
Draft experiment
Matter analysis
Sources checked
Revision queued
Leave more room for legal judgment
Follow each research lead into the original judgment. The time saved on discovery is useful only when it gives you more time to test the law and the opposing view.
Question to source
An evolving workflow
The individual preview path
From question to source review
Work independently, with a clear trail
Explore research leads, then decide what deserves closer reading
Cited legal research
Ask in plain language and treat results as candidates. Open each judgment to check its context and weight.
Experimental drafting
Try an outline or passage using non-confidential material. Drafting is experimental and not dependable for production legal work.
Document review options
Check the source material yourself. Ask the team which document review tools are currently available in your workspace.
Configured research workflows
Discuss repeatable steps with our team if your practice needs a configured workflow beyond the preview.
Better research begins when a promising result leads you to the judgment, including the qualification or contrary point you might otherwise miss.
1 matter
Each source check can change the next question. The practitioner remains responsible for what the research does, and does not, support.
