Legal exhibit reference reconciler

For litigation support teams, turn authorized drafts and exhibit indexes into counsel-reviewed reference report. Address this specific problem: briefs cite inconsistent exhibit identifiers. The aim: mechanical citation consistency across exhibit packs. The pilot tests whether that benefit holds up against reviewer effort and real operating costs.

The buyer creates a project, supplies authorized drafts and exhibit indexes, and confirms scope and access. Users correct extracted facts, resolve flagged uncertainties and approve the final counsel-reviewed reference report before use. Retain source links and a version history for the next cycle.

How the AI works

AI assists these bounded tasks: match cited identifiers; flag missing exhibits; compare referenced pages. Use only authorized drafts and exhibit indexes and preserve uncertainty in counsel-reviewed reference report. Keep model suggestions separate from verified facts. Link factual outputs to authorized input evidence and show missing information explicitly. Use deterministic checks for counts, dates, identifiers and arithmetic where applicable. A designated reviewer validates consequential outputs and signs off the delivered result.

Safeguards

Preserve matter confidentiality, access boundaries and original evidence. Qualified professionals review legal interpretations and final client documents. One organization, one defined input format and one representative pilot batch using authorized drafts and exhibit indexes. Professional judgment, physical inspections, live external actions and production certification remain outside this prototype. Require appropriate access and publication approval. Preserve source material, label AI drafts and make corrections traceable. Measure false positives and missed cases alongside speed.

What to build first

Costed pilot: One organization, one defined input format and one representative pilot batch using authorized drafts and exhibit indexes. Professional judgment, physical inspections, live external actions and production certification remain outside this prototype. Start with one buyer organization and a bounded set of representative inputs. Implement the first two modules: match cited identifiers; flag missing exhibits. Support the third task through an assisted review queue: compare referenced pages. Handle the remaining required functions manually until validated. Include input upload, source references, user correction, a reviewer approval step and export of counsel-reviewed reference report. Authentication, account isolation, deletion controls and basic operational logging are included. Specialized production certification, live write integrations and broader rollout are not included unless explicitly stated.

What it can connect to

Authorized matter files, firm templates and approved legal knowledge collections. Source repositories, task trackers and report exports. Keep findings as review proposals until authorized owners accept the resulting actions. Begin with uploads and exports of authorized drafts and exhibit indexes. Any named system or connector is a candidate requiring current access and compatibility checks; no live connection is included by default.

The screens in detail

Open on a review queue ordered by reviewer-selected priorities. Show each finding beside the original evidence and applicable rule. Provide accept, dismiss and needs-information controls with reasons. A separate report view summarizes confirmed findings and unresolved items, not raw AI flags. Open with brief and sources; move into legal exhibit reference reconciler for the detailed task; finish in review and delivery for review and handoff. Show the source record, uncertainty and approval status beside each proposed output.