A response to a claim starts from a blank Word page or a copy of an old matter, with the facts retyped from Clio. The assistant prepares a draft from the firm's template and the matter data, with checked links to rulings. The lawyer edits it, signs with DocuSign and files it through the court e-filing system.
Built for ISO 27001NIS2 DORA
When a notice of a received claim arrives from the court e-filing system, the lawyer has a deadline for the response. They open the matter in Clio, read the documents and correspondence the client provided, find a similar response from an earlier matter in SharePoint and start from it: change the parties, dates, amounts and facts, and check in Westlaw whether the rulings cited there are still good law. Half the time goes on structure and retyping facts, not on the legal argument. Motions for interim measures or for an extension of a deadline are written the same way, only faster.
The assistant starts from the matter, not from a blank page. The lawyer selects the matter in Clio and the document type: complaint, response, motion, reply. From Clio the assistant takes the parties, the chronology, the attached documents and earlier court filings, and from SharePoint the firm's template with the required structure, and it prepares a Word draft: an introductory part with the case details, the facts with links to the matter documents, an outline of the legal arguments and the claims. Where the firm has relied on case law in similar matters, the assistant inserts a ruling only when it finds it in Westlaw and verifies the number and date; in place of a ruling it cannot find, it leaves a marked blank. The lawyer writes the arguments, edits, signs with DocuSign and files through the court e-filing system personally, and the assistant has no access to the court system. We implement it with Claude through Amazon Bedrock in an EU region, matter data is not used to train models, and every draft and its sources are logged.
Four steps from input to a record in your system, with human approval wherever there is risk.
In the Clio matter or in a Word window, the lawyer selects the document type: complaint, response, motion, appeal. They state the court, the deadline and the main claims in a few sentences. If the claim arrived through the court e-filing system, its text is attached as the source document.
From Clio the assistant takes the parties and their details, the matter chronology, the attached evidence and earlier court filings, and from SharePoint the firm's template. It builds the statement of facts with links to specific matter documents and an outline of the claims following the template.
Where case law is needed, the assistant searches Westlaw, verifies the ruling's number and date and only then inserts it. In place of a ruling it cannot find, it leaves a marked gap. The draft appears in a Word file in the matter folder in SharePoint, with a list of what the lawyer has to check and write personally.
The lawyer writes the legal arguments, corrects the facts, signs the document with DocuSign and files it through the court e-filing system. The assistant has no access to the e-filing system and sends nothing. Every month we review how much of the draft remained in the final text and refine the templates.
Templates for complaints, responses, motions and appeals from your SharePoint, with the firm's structure and wording, which you maintain yourselves.
Parties, chronology and documents are taken from Clio through an API or an export, and the draft is attached to the same matter so that the whole team can see it.
Each ruling is inserted only after it is found in Westlaw and its number and date are verified. Rulings not found are marked as a gap for the lawyer to fill.
Every draft and its sources are logged, lawyers are trained, and during the first month we monitor and refine the templates against real matters.
Claude through Bedrock in an EU region + Clio data + Word templates. We choose the platform by the task and by where your data may be located. For more on this service and its limits, see the service page.
No. The assistant only creates a Word draft in the firm's environment. The lawyer writes the arguments, signs the document with DocuSign and files it through the court e-filing system. The assistant has no access to the e-filing system, DocuSign or the client's email.
The assistant inserts a ruling only when it finds it in Westlaw and verifies the number and date; in place of a ruling it cannot find, a marked gap remains. The lawyer opens and checks every link personally before signing, and this is written into the firm's working procedure.
We connect to Clio through an API or an export, depending on the version, and to SharePoint in your Microsoft 365 tenant. We deliberately do not integrate with the court e-filing system: the lawyer files. We have no official partnerships with these systems and work with their public interfaces.
At the end of the month lawyers reconstruct from the Outlook calendar and from memory how many hours went to each matter, and some of the work…
A similar matter is searched for in Clio, SharePoint folders and Westlaw, and the ruling a colleague cited last year takes half a day to find.
Enquiries from the website and Outlook wait until someone reads them, checks for a conflict of interest and replies.
The contract the client sent is read from the top, and the checklist is kept in the lawyer's head.
This service is delivered by specialists with valid international certifications. Their expertise is confirmed by independent organisations, not by us.
AI systems are deployed with protection against data leakage and model abuse.
The AI security programme and its controls are managed following the ISACA methodology.
AI risks are identified and managed like any other IT risk.
We reply within 1 business day
