Brief review · Before filing
AI legal brief review, before anything is filed.
A brief fails on the citation nobody re-read. HIGHCOURT checks the draft against the law on your machine and the record in your file, and shows where it does not hold.
What gets checked before filing
Every statement in the draft is treated as a claim that has to be supported.
Every citation
Each authority is checked against the law held on the machine. A citation that cannot be found there is flagged for the attorney, not passed through.
Every quotation
Quoted language is compared with the source it claims to come from, so a misquote is caught before opposing counsel finds it.
Every factual claim
Statements about the record are tied back to the exhibit and the exact words behind them. A claim with nothing behind it is named.
Whether the authority binds
Good law is reported per point, not per case, and whether an authority binds depends on the court you are in. It says which, and every answer is dated.
Private briefings — now booking
Request a BriefingTwo readers, neither of them the author
A model asked to check itself agrees with itself. So the review is done by two separate readers.
HC Critic (MKC2)
A second reader fine-tuned by Privilege AI. Before you see a draft, it picks out the flawed passage 96 times in 100, against 73 for the stock model, on 4,403 held-out items it never saw in training.
The Adjudicator
When the draft is done, it tests every citation, quotation and claim against the record and the law, and disagrees where they do not support it.
Why the model never writes the citation
A citation checker bolted onto a chatbot checks after the fact. This works the other way round.
Most tools let the AI write the citation, then check afterwards whether the case was real. HIGHCOURT never lets it write one. The law on your machine is searched first, and the citation is copied off the page the passage came from.
That is why it cannot cite a case that does not exist, and why the review that follows is about whether the authority supports the point, not whether it is real.
Questions firms ask, and the honest answers.
Does it replace cite-checking by an associate?
No. It does the reading nobody has time to do and shows its working, so the attorney starts from the problems rather than from page one. Sign-off stays with the lawyer.
How does it check citations without the internet?
The law is held on the machine: 9.98 million court decisions and 18.1 million checked citations. Verification never depends on reaching an outside service.
What does HC Critic do that The Adjudicator does not?
HC Critic reads the draft before you see it and picks out the passage most likely to be flawed. The Adjudicator works at the end, testing each citation, quotation and claim against the record and the law.
What happens when a citation cannot be verified?
It is flagged for the attorney rather than treated as good. Nothing is relied on until it has been checked against the law on the machine.
Does the brief leave the firm during review?
No. Review runs on the firm’s own workstation, which is designed to run with no internet connection at all. The draft, the record and the result stay on the firm’s own disk.
Private briefings — now booking
See what it produces.
A private briefing for your partners — the real screens and the actual work product, section by section, so you can judge the output for yourself. No sales deck.
Every install is set up direct by the team that built it — configured to your practice areas, with pricing quoted against your seat count on the call.