Legal
Cut first-pass contract review time, answer the business faster, and spend your hours on the hard clauses.
Updated 4 days ago · 9 sources
Who already did it
- Enterprise
DLA Piper
The firm had piloted a legal AI tool and had to decide whether to scale it.
5,000 licences across the firm after the pilot.
How they did it
It ran a pilot across several practices and workflows, then scaled to 5,000 Harvey licences worldwide. The head of innovation said the pilot results and the pull from the business made the call.
Tool used Harvey
- Public sector
Los Angeles County Superior Court
Judges were reading hundreds of pages per motion before they could write a ruling.
How they did it
Six civil judges got a tool called Learned Hand. It summarises the filings and drafts a ruling in the judge's own writing style. Judges have to read and edit every draft before they adopt it.
Tool used Learned Hand
- Enterprise
Linklaters
Off-the-shelf legal AI could not handle the firm's largest and messiest client data sets.
How they did it
It set up a team called Applied Intelligence. Lawyers and data scientists work together there, building one-off AI tools where off-the-shelf products cannot do the job. The firm already runs Legora, Harvey and Copilot alongside it.
- Learn from thisSmall business
Mike Sethi and William Rounds, immigration lawyers
Two lawyers filed appeal briefs resting on cases and quotations that never existed.
Six-month suspension, plus referral to the State Bar of California.
So: Name one person to open and read every cited case before filing. Log that check in the matter file.
The Volokh Conspiracy, Reason · Jun 2026
How they did it
The briefs cited two decisions that do not exist and put invented quotes into real ones. One lawyer called the fake citations typographical errors. Asked in open court whether AI was used, the other said no.
- Learn from thisEnterprise
Deloitte Australia
A report the government paid for cited research and a court quote that never existed.
Refunded A$97,000 of a A$440,000 contract.
So: Ask every adviser in writing whether AI drafted the report. Get the name of the person who checked each source.
How they did it
Deloitte used generative AI on a review for Australia's employment department. The report quoted a federal court judgment that was never written, and cited academic papers that do not exist. Deloitte published a corrected version and paid money back.
What to use, who to call
Harvey
Answers legal research questions and drafts documents against your own files, with links back to the source it used.
enterpriseMonthsSeparate software to buyIT sign-offIs this your first move?
What it fixes. Your best lawyers spend hours on first drafts and background research that nobody ever reads.
Good fit when. You run repeat, document-heavy work like due diligence (checking contracts and records before a deal).
Skip it if. Skip it if your team is five people. Seat prices and setup only pay back across hundreds of lawyers.
Start with. Ask which pieces of work repeat every month. Those are the only ones worth a pilot.
Take 7 questions to the call
Why call them. You have hundreds of lawyers, repeat document work, and a budget for a real rollout.
What they fix. Your best lawyers spend hours on first drafts and background research nobody sees.
Also used by. DLA Piper, Slaughter and May
- When your tool gives me a citation, is it checked against a real case database before I see it?
- Has any court tested whether using you affects privilege (the protection that keeps lawyer-client advice confidential)?
- Where are my documents processed and stored, and do they ever leave my country?
- Is my client work used to train your models or anyone else's, and will you put that in the contract?
- What happens to my documents and my query history on the day we terminate?
- Which customer is closest to my size and practice mix, and can I call them without your team listening?
- Show me a firm that ran a pilot and did not buy. What went wrong there?
Spellbook
Handles contract redlining (marking up suggested changes) inside Microsoft Word, against the positions you normally accept.
per seat, small team to enterpriseUnder a weekSeparate software to buyIT sign-offIs this your first move?
What it fixes. Small legal teams reviewing the same vendor agreements and confidentiality forms over and over, by hand.
Good fit when. Your team lives in Word and reviews a steady stream of routine commercial contracts.
Skip it if. Bespoke, high-stakes drafting where every clause gets negotiated. You will fight the suggestions.
Start with. Run it over ten contracts you already signed. Count what it caught and what it missed.
Luminance
Reads a large pile of contracts and flags the odd ones: missing clauses, unusual terms, obligations you forgot.
mid-market to enterpriseWeeksSeparate software to buyIT sign-offIs this your first move?
What it fixes. Nobody knows what sits in the contracts your company signed before you arrived.
Good fit when. A deal, an audit, or a new rule forces you to read thousands of old agreements.
Skip it if. You have a few hundred contracts and a decent filing system. Read them.
Start with. Count your live contracts. If you cannot get the number in a day, that is the problem.
Take 6 questions to the call
Why call them. A deal, an audit, or a new rule forces you to review everything at once.
What they fix. You inherited thousands of signed contracts and nobody has read them since.
- What accuracy do you get on my document types, and who measured it, you or a customer?
- Where are the documents processed, and can everything stay inside my own environment?
- When the system is unsure about a clause, what does a human see, and when?
- What happens to the document set after the review ends, and can you show me it was deleted?
- How do you keep privileged material separate from everything else in a review?
- Which customer ran a review my size, and what did the tool miss on that job?
Ironclad
Runs your contract process end to end: request, drafting, approval, signature and storage, with AI review built in.
mid-market to enterpriseMonthsSeparate software to buyIT sign-offIs this your first move?
What it fixes. Sales chasing legal on Slack because nobody can see where a contract is stuck.
Good fit when. Contract volume is growing, your team is not, and the business complains about how long you take.
Skip it if. Your templates are a mess. A CLM (contract lifecycle management system) will only speed up the mess.
Start with. Time ten recent contracts from request to signature. That number is your business case.
Take 6 questions to the call
Why call them. Your contract volume is rising, your headcount is flat, and the business blames legal.
What they fix. Contracts sit in email and nobody can say where a deal is stuck or what you agreed.
Also used by. Dropbox, Rivian, Zoom
- How much template and playbook (your standard position on each clause) clean-up do we finish first?
- What does the export look like on termination: every contract, every version, every approval?
- Which AI features are generally available today, and which are still in early access?
- How does the system decide a clause is off-policy, and can my team see and change that rule?
- What is the total first-year cost including setup, and who on my team is needed full time?
- Which customers moved off you, and what did they say broke?
What everyone is asking
- NewJul 2026
Best AI for contract review right now?
That depends on where your team works. Spellbook and tools like it sit inside Word for routine commercial contracts. Ironclad runs the whole contract process. Luminance is for large piles of old agreements.
The short answer
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
- NewJul 2026
Is it malpractice to use AI for legal research?
Courts have not banned AI research. They have punished lawyers who filed citations they never read. The heaviest orders went to the lawyers who then hid what happened.
The short answer
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
- NewJul 2026
Does using AI waive attorney-client privilege (your right to keep legal advice confidential)?
Courts disagree so far. Some have treated AI tools as tools rather than third parties. One court found privilege waived where a client used a public tool without a lawyer directing it.
The short answer
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
- NewJul 2026
Will AI actually make my legal team faster?
Drafting speeds up and checking eats some of that back. Teams that measure tool usage, rather than how long a job takes end to end, cannot answer this.
The short answer
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
Try this today
Turn a contract into a dated obligations list
15 minYou see every deadline, notice period and renewal date in one table, not buried in pages.
Copy the prompt
You are a contracts analyst. Below is one agreement. Build a table with these columns: obligation, who owes it, trigger or date, section number, exact quoted wording. Cover payment terms, notice periods, renewal and termination dates, service levels, audit rights, and any reporting duty. Use only text that appears in the document. Quote the wording word for word. Do not paraphrase, and do not add anything that is not written there. If a date depends on another event, name that event. If a section is unclear, list it separately under CHECK THIS rather than guessing. Agreement: [PASTE THE FULL TEXT OF THE CONTRACT]
One check first. A first pass for a lawyer, never a citation or a legal conclusion. Check every quote yourself. Keep privileged files out of consumer chatbots.
Compare a supplier draft against your standard positions
20 minYou get a clause-by-clause gap list before the call, so you argue about the three that matter.
Copy the prompt
You are a contracts analyst. First I paste our standard position on each clause. Then I paste a supplier's draft. Work through our positions in order. For each one: name the clause, quote the supplier's exact wording, mark it BETTER, WORSE or SAME against our position, then give one sentence a non-lawyer could act on. If the draft says nothing on that point, write MISSING and move on. Do not guess at wording, do not summarise anything I have not pasted, and do not draft replacement language. End with the three worst gaps, ranked, and say why each one is worst. Our positions: [PASTE YOUR STANDARD POSITIONS] Supplier draft: [PASTE THE DRAFT]
One check first. Treat the ranking as a first pass for a lawyer, not a citation or a legal conclusion. Never paste privileged drafts into a consumer chatbot.
Rewrite a legal position in plain English
10 minYour business team understands the answer on first read, so the same question stops coming back.
Copy the prompt
You are a translator between lawyers and business teams. Below is a legal position I have already decided. Rewrite it for [ROLE, FOR EXAMPLE A SALES DIRECTOR] in under 200 words. Use these headings: What you can do. What you cannot do. What to do if a customer pushes back. Who to ask. Write the way a national newspaper writes. No Latin, no clause numbers, and no hedging words such as generally or typically. Keep my decision exactly as I wrote it. Do not soften it, widen it, or add exceptions I did not give you. If my position leaves a question open, list it at the end under OPEN. My position: [PASTE YOUR POSITION]
One check first. A first pass for a lawyer, not a citation or a legal conclusion. Your position may be privileged, so keep it off consumer chatbots.
Worth following
Artificial Lawyer
Legal technology news site covering AI in law firms and legal departments.
daily · publication
Why them
First to report most legal AI deals, and openly sceptical when the claims get loud.
LawSites — Bob Ambrogi
Robert Ambrogi, a lawyer and journalist who has covered legal technology for two decades.
several times a week · blog
Why them
He tests products, reads the court orders, and writes plainly about what actually shipped.
Legal IT Insider
Trade publication covering legal technology buying, vendors, and law firm IT.
daily · publication
Why them
Strong on what firms actually bought, including the deals nobody announces loudly.
Legal Evolution — Bill Henderson
A law professor's education project on how the legal services market is changing.
monthly · publication
Why them
Long, careful essays. Read it when you need to think, not when you need news.
Legaltech Hub
A directory and research site listing legal technology products by what they do.
weekly · directory
Why them
Worth reading before a buying cycle, so you know who exists beyond the loudest three.
The Volokh Conspiracy
A law professor blog hosted at Reason, running since 2002.
daily · blog
Why them
It posts the AI sanctions orders fast, with the judge's actual words attached.