AI for law firms: contract review, intake and precedent search
Associates stopped dreadingcontract review.
AI for a law firm means a system trained on your firm's own precedents, playbooks and past matters, not a general chatbot guessing at law. The work that pays off first is first-pass contract review, precedent and knowledge search, and client intake, because those are the tasks where associates spend hours producing something a partner then redoes.
The rule we hold to is that the system never signs anything. It reads, flags, drafts and cites, and a lawyer decides. Every output points back to the clause, precedent or memo it came from, so review means checking a citation rather than trusting a summary.
We built exactly this for a 45-attorney regional firm. First-pass review went from hours to minutes, with every flag traced to the firm's own playbook.
The conditions this work is for.
First-pass review eats the associate's week
Reading a 60-page agreement to find the eight clauses that matter is not legal judgment, it is search. The judgment starts after those clauses are on the table, and that is where you want the billable hour spent.
The precedent exists and nobody can find it
Your firm has almost certainly handled this matter before. The memo is in a folder, on a server, under a client name nobody remembers. So the work gets redone at full rate.
Intake is a bottleneck with a partner in it
Conflict checks, matter setup and the first client conversation all queue behind one or two people. Prospective clients wait, and some of them stop waiting.
The playbook lives in one partner's head
Which deviations are acceptable, which are firm policy, which depend on the client. Juniors learn it by getting redlined for two years. That is an expensive curriculum.
Associates stopped dreading contract review.
Regional law firm. 45 attorneys.
A 45-attorney regional firm. Same problem, same objections, and a system the associates ended up defending.
Priced against your budget, not our hours.
- Flat rate, scoped in writing before we start. No hourly billing, no overrun charges, no mid-project upsell.
- Engagements run $12K to $100K or more. The number depends on what we are building, not on how long it takes us.
- Pricing is tied to a line item in your budget. If you spend a known amount on proposal writing or contract review each year, that number is the target. If the system does not move it, we failed.
- Six weeks from kickoff to a working system, with 50+ hours spent inside your firm before anyone writes code.
Scope and price are written down after the first two phases and reviewed by you. If we cannot agree on both, we do not start.
What people ask before they hire us.
Is it safe to use AI on privileged client documents?
It can be, and the architecture is what decides it. We build so that your documents stay in infrastructure you control, are never used to train a third-party model, and are reachable only by people who already have matter access. Where a client engagement letter or a regulator requires data residency, the system is deployed to meet it. Any consultant who cannot draw you that diagram should not be handling your files.
Will AI replace our associates or paralegals?
No, and firms that try it that way get bad work and a hostile team. What changes is which part of the task a person does: the system does the reading and retrieval, the lawyer does the judgment, the negotiation and the signature. In the firms we have built for, the same headcount took on more matters rather than shrinking.
Can it be trained on our firm's own precedents and playbook?
That is the entire point. A general model knows general law, which is worth very little to you. We index your precedents, closed matters, clause library and the standards your partners actually apply, so the system flags a deviation the way your firm defines a deviation, and cites the document it is relying on.
What about hallucinations and made-up citations?
We build retrieval-first, which means the system is only allowed to answer from documents it can point at, and it reports a confidence score. Low-confidence items are routed to a human instead of being answered smoothly. The failure mode you want is the system saying it does not know.
How long before our firm sees something working?
Six weeks to a working system, with a narrow first scope on purpose. One contract type, one practice group, one measurable turnaround time. That is enough for partners to judge it on results rather than on a demo.
AI consulting, Toronto
The general engagement. Six weeks, flat rate, a working system rather than a roadmap.
AI for real estate
Deal documents, offering memoranda, listing workflows and market research, built on your own deal history.
AI for professional services
Engineering, accounting, agencies and consultancies. Proposals, compliance, reporting and internal knowledge.
Tell us where the work is stuck.
The first conversation is a diagnosis, not a pitch. If you do not need us, we will tell you that instead.
Start a conversation