·3 min read
Research that stays on the matter file
A legal assistant that cites the open web is a malpractice pattern. The work product has to live on the matter.
Photo: Sora Shimazaki on Pexels
Associates already know how to search. The failure is a memo that looks finished and cites a case that does not exist, or a holding that belongs to another jurisdiction.
Tools in this market, like Harvey and CoCounsel, are useful when they sit on the corpus the firm already trusts: the matter documents, the preferred reporters, the playbooks.
The open web is not a closing binder. A model that “recalls” a famous judgment will mix years, courts and dicta. The partner will not discover that in the first skim. The other side might.
Grounding is the product. Retrieve the complaint, the contract, the prior advice. If a proposition needs an authority, retrieve that authority. If it is not in the set, say so.
Human review here is not optional colour. It is the licence. The assistant drafts. The lawyer signs. The log should show what was retrieved when the draft was made.
Do not fine-tune on last year’s memos and call it expertise. Those memos include strategy you may not want replayed, and law that has moved.
The test is whether a new joiner can see, on the matter file, why the sentence is there.
The TruFyre Way
Research that leaves the matter file is a risk. TruFyre retrieves from that file and the firm's approved authorities, with citations the associate can check.