Your clients are doing evidence preparation either way, at home, after hours, in formats you’d never use. Some of them are pasting declarations into ChatGPT and arriving at your office with theories built on hallucinated citations. Some are doing it manually and bringing you a shoebox of paper. Some are giving up on the work entirely and asking you to do it on the clock.
CasePilot is the alternative. It’s the AI you’d want them to use before they walk in.
The product is agentic, not conversational. It cites every claim to a verbatim quote in their evidence. It refuses to ship anything it can’t verify. The output is a draft a paralegal could produce, marked for attorney review, with provenance attached to every sentence. You review and refine. You don’t unwind.
The intake meeting where you usually unwind a client's misunderstanding of their own evidence is gone. The client walks in with a registry of every document, hashed and indexed. You start at substance, not setup.
Cross-referencing W-2s against declarations, building chronological timelines, surfacing contradictions across years of filings. Work that traditionally takes a paralegal a full week. CasePilot does it before the client signs your engagement letter. You bill for review and strategy, not transcription.
Upload an entire production at once: hundreds of PDFs, email exports, financial records, scanned exhibits. CasePilot deduplicates, classifies, indexes, and assigns exhibit numbers automatically. The 4,000-page production becomes a queryable case file.
Every factual assertion in a CasePilot declaration ships with the verbatim quote, page number, and exhibit ID. Hand the draft to your paralegal for cleanup; the structure and citations are already there. The argument is yours to refine.
Every claim traces to a source byte. Every numerical value has a logged Python computation. Every export is marked [DRAFT, ATTORNEY REVIEW REQUIRED]. We provide a methodology brief you can share with your bar association or malpractice carrier explaining the human-review-required architecture. Adopting CasePilot doesn't create a new disclosure obligation for you.
Every general-purpose AI your clients are using, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, the legal-branded chat assistants now appearing in firm products, is built on the same underlying architecture. A single large language model performs planning, retrieval, calculation, and writing inside one continuous context. That architecture has known failure modes:
These aren’t bugs that get fixed in the next model release. They’re properties of the architecture itself.
CasePilot is built on a different architecture. It’s a five-stage agentic reasoning framework, the same paradigm software engineers use to navigate codebases of thousands of files. The language model plans and writes. Deterministic code does the retrieval, the calculation, and the verification. The model is structurally prevented from inventing citations or performing arithmetic. If verification fails, the output is refused, not shipped with a caveat.
What that means for your purposes: output a paralegal could have produced. Not output you have to assume is wrong until proven right.
For attorneys recommending CasePilot to self-rep clients (or to opposing self-rep parties to streamline discovery): no formal partnership required. Clients pay $299 once and have full access for 12 months. Many Oregon family-law attorneys now make this recommendation as part of intake.
If you have questions about enterprise access, volume pricing, or integration with your firm’s workflow, reach out directly. We respond within one business day.
If you need to brief your firm’s malpractice carrier, your bar’s ethics committee, or a client’s general counsel before adopting CasePilot, request our written methodology brief. It covers the architectural claims that make every output reviewable, the human-review requirement built into every export, and the data-handling controls that make CasePilot suitable for documents containing privileged or sensitive material.