Legal

DarrowEverett's lawyers uploaded five years of the couple's financial records into Harvey and asked it to trace commingling — the mixing of separate money into joint accounts, which is what turns separate property into shared marital property under the law. Harvey worked through five years of statements, wires and joint tax filings and returned a source-linked analysis: every dollar it traced, with a citation to the exact statement or transaction it came from. The trail accounted for $2.2 million that opposing counsel had claimed was untouchable separate property. DarrowEverett's partners put the traced records in front of opposing counsel before the hearing rather than saving them for cross-examination. Opposing counsel conceded the point rather than contest a paper trail with citations attached to every line, which reopened the rest of the estate calculation and added more than $4 million in value for the client.

Tool used Harvey

The court signed a roughly year-long, $300,000 contract with Learned Hand, a company built specifically for judicial work that was already running in trial courts across ten states. Its founder calls it a "judicial sous chef" — meant to prep the ingredients, not decide the menu. Six Los Angeles civil judges got access starting in February 2026, pointed at the exact filings that had been piling up: summary judgment motions and class-action settlement approvals. The tool reads the filings, produces a summary, and drafts a tentative ruling — a preliminary decision written to match that judge's own past writing style — with every sentence run through a fact-check step called Deep Verify, which checks each claim against the case law it cites and links back to the source so a judge can click through rather than take it on faith. The one hard rule the court built in: a judge has to personally read and edit every draft before adopting it as an actual ruling. One participating judge, speaking anonymously, added a caution worth keeping: even an AI suggestion he ultimately rejected became a reference point that shaped the ruling he wrote instead — a reminder that a draft is never a neutral starting point, rejected or not.

Tool used Learned Hand

Linklaters set up a standing unit called Applied Intelligence that pairs lawyers directly with data scientists, rather than routing requests through an IT department. Its job is narrow on purpose: build one-off AI tools for the specific matters where an off-the-shelf product can't do the job, working across several underlying AI models instead of committing to one vendor. Co-founder Tom Quoroll said the team was built "not just for technical capability, but for the collaboration and judgment needed to turn complexity into impact" — the pairing of lawyer and data scientist in the same room is the point, not a detail. It runs alongside the firm's existing Harvey, Legora and Copilot deployments rather than replacing them: those handle the daily, repeatable work, and Applied Intelligence exists for the matters that don't fit a template.

Almost every public comparison is written by a vendor. Ask two customers of each to run the same ten contracts and tell you what got missed.

Also worth a look. Spellbook, Ironclad, Luminance, Harvey

• Discussion 1
• Discussion 2
• Discussion 3

Court guidance now says one thing over and over. Read the case before you cite it. Nobody gets excused because a tool wrote the brief.

Also worth a look. Check every citation in a primary source, Ban AI research outright, Require a written AI disclosure on every filing

• Discussion 1
• Discussion 2
• Discussion 3

The rule your team can follow today: privileged material only goes into a tool you have a signed contract with.

Also worth a look. Enterprise tool under contract, no training on your data, Public consumer chatbot, No AI on privileged material at all

• Discussion 1

Lawyers are more doubtful than vendors. The usual complaint is that checking time simply replaces drafting time.

Also worth a look. Measure how long a piece of work takes end to end, Measure tool usage, Measure outside counsel spend

• Discussion 1