Try Claude
Academic ResearchSearch papers, authors, citations
AI Tools for Appellate Attorneys
AI tools that help appellate attorneys research precedent, analyze circuit splits, track SCOTUS decisions, and draft stronger appellate briefs.
Get started for free
Works in Chat, Cowork and Code
CircuitPositionKey case
1st Cir.Applied Loper BrightDoe v. HHS
4th Cir.Limited ChevronNRDC v. EPA
9th Cir.Applied Loper BrightCal. v. FERC
D.C. Cir.Transitional — split panelCtr. v. NRC
14 circuit decisions reviewed · Loper Bright adopted in 8
Multi-jurisdictional case law research
Search federal circuit courts, state appellate courts, and SCOTUS decisions simultaneously. Map circuit splits, identify controlling precedent, and find cases with analogous fact patterns across 15+ jurisdictions.
Map the current circuit split on whether a criminal defendant's abandoned rental car has Fourth Amendment protection after the rental period expires. Which circuits say yes, which say no?
Split confirmed. Protection: 4th Circuit (US v. Byrd, 2018 SCOTUS — temporary, unclear). No protection: 6th Circuit (US v. Burnett, 2022) and 9th Circuit (US v. Alabi, 2023). Split is active — cert petition filed October 2024 in US v. Harrison (D.C. Cir.). Your case is in the 6th Circuit — adverse authority.
ToolRouter search_cases
CircuitHoldingKey case
SCOTUSTemporary — see ByrdByrd v. United States
6thNo protectionUS v. Burnett
9thNo protectionUS v. Alabi
D.C. Cir.Cert petition filed Oct 2024US v. Harrison
Active split · cert petition pending
Academic and law review research
Find law review articles, treatises, and academic commentary relevant to your appellate argument. Use scholarly authorities to support novel legal arguments and distinguish existing precedent in your brief.
Find law review articles from the last 3 years criticizing the broad application of qualified immunity in excessive force cases. I need scholarly sources citing empirical evidence on its deterrence effect.
Found 14 law review articles. Most cited: Schwartz (2021, Yale Law Journal) — empirical study showing QI rarely dispositive in actual case outcomes. Baradaran (2023, Harvard) — systematic analysis of 1,000+ cases finding QI denied in only 3.9%. Both cited favorably by 3rd, 6th, and 9th Circuit dissenters.
ToolRouter search_papers
AuthorJournalYear
SchwartzYale Law Journal2021
BaradaranHarvard Law Review2023
BlumUCLA Law Review2022
14 articles found · cited in 3rd, 6th, 9th Circuit dissenters
SCOTUS cert petition research
Research SCOTUS certiorari grant patterns, circuit splits, and amicus curiae strategies. Identify cases where cert is more likely based on the Court's historical grant criteria.
Research the factors SCOTUS has emphasized in granting cert in cases involving circuit splits on Fourth Amendment digital privacy issues. How deep does the split need to be?
SCOTUS has granted cert on digital privacy splits averaging 4–5 circuits in conflict. Key additional factor: government's position matters significantly — when DOJ supports cert, grant rate doubles. Cases with amicus support from EFF or ACLU also correlate with higher grant rates. Timing: Court avoids granting during election years.
ToolRouter research
Avg Circuit Depth
4–5 circuits in conflict before cert granted
DOJ Position
Grant rate doubles when government supports cert
Amicus Effect
EFF/ACLU support correlates with higher grant rates
Timing Factor
Court avoids granting during election years
Standard of review analysis
Research the appropriate standard of appellate review for specific rulings — de novo, clear error, abuse of discretion. Find controlling circuit authority on how each standard applies to different issue types in your case.
What is the 9th Circuit's standard of review for a district court's ruling denying a preliminary injunction for a trademark infringement claim? Find the most recent en banc or panel decision addressing this.
Current standard: Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council (2008 SCOTUS) — abuse of discretion for the overall PI ruling, but questions of law reviewed de novo. Most recent 9th Circuit application: Disney v. Nelson (9th Cir. 2023) — affirmed district court using this bifurcated standard.
ToolRouter search_cases
Overall PI Standard
Abuse of discretion — Winter v. NRDC (2008 SCOTUS)
Legal Questions
De novo — likelihood of success on trademark infringement merits
Factual Findings
Clear error — underlying likelihood of confusion findings
Most Recent 9th Cir.
Disney v. Nelson (2023) — bifurcated standard reaffirmed
Legislative history and regulatory context research
Research the legislative history of statutes at issue on appeal. Find congressional records, committee reports, and agency statements relevant to statutory interpretation arguments.
Research the legislative history of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, specifically the intent behind the "unauthorized access" language when Congress amended the statute in 1986.
Found Senate Report 99-432 (1986) — key passage: committee expressly limited "unauthorized access" to external hackers, not employees misusing authorized access. House floor debate (October 1986): sponsor Rep. Hughes clarified "insiders always have authorization to the system." Both cited by Van Buren majority.
ToolRouter research
Senate Report 99-432
Expressly limited "unauthorized access" to external hackers, not employee misuse
House Floor Debate
Rep. Hughes (Oct 1986): insiders always have authorization to the system
SCOTUS Van Buren
Both legislative sources cited in majority opinion (2021)
Interpretation
Narrow reading of "without authorization" supported by original legislative intent
Opposing brief analysis and counter-research
After receiving the opposing brief, research all cited authorities to identify distinguishable cases, contrary authority, and developments the opposing party failed to disclose.
The opposing brief relies heavily on Smith v. City (4th Cir. 2019) for their qualified immunity argument. Find any subsequent cases limiting or distinguishing Smith v. City, and any en banc or SCOTUS proceedings involving the same issue.
Found 3 distinguishing decisions. Jones v. County (4th Cir. 2022) limited Smith v. City to situations where the officer had prior written notice. SCOTUS denied cert in Smith (2020). Two district courts within the 4th Circuit have distinguished Smith on your exact fact pattern — excessive force without verbal warning.
ToolRouter search_cases
CaseCourtYear
Jones v. County4th Cir.2022
Williams v. DeptE.D. Va.2023
Brown v. CityD. Md.2023
3 distinguishing decisions found · SCOTUS cert denied 2020
Ready-to-use prompts
Circuit split mapping
Map the current circuit split on whether ERISA pre-empts state law insurance mandates for mental health parity. List each circuit's position and the key case citations.
Cert petition research
Research the factors SCOTUS considers when granting certiorari on First Amendment commercial speech cases. What percentage of petitions are granted, and which issues are the current Court most interested in?
Law review research
Find law review articles from 2021 to present on the application of the major questions doctrine after West Virginia v. EPA. Which scholars support expanding it, and which are critical?
Standard of review research
What is the standard of appellate review in the 5th Circuit for a district court's ruling granting summary judgment on a Title VII employment discrimination claim? Find the most recent controlling cases.
Legislative history research
Research the legislative history of the ADA Title I reasonable accommodation requirement. Find committee reports, floor statements, and agency guidance from 1990 through the 2008 ADAAA amendments that address the "undue hardship" standard.
Amicus curiae research
Find amicus briefs filed in the Supreme Court in the last 5 years involving free speech on social media platforms. Which organizations are the most active amici, and what positions have they argued?
Adverse authority check
Find all 11th Circuit decisions from 2020 to present interpreting the "arising under" jurisdiction standard for federal question cases involving state law claims with embedded federal questions.
Regulatory history research
Research the rulemaking history for the FTC's noncompete ban rule. Find all public comments, agency rationale, and any circuit court decisions on the preliminary injunction to block the rule.
Tools to power your best work
Deep ResearchAI research reports with citations
Wikipedia LookupWikipedia search in 50+ languages
PDFRead, analyze & merge PDFs
Regulatory ActionsSEC, CFPB, FDIC & Federal Register
Word DocumentsCreate, read & modify Word docs
Legal ResearchCase law, statutes, regulations & legislation worldwide
NewsSearch and track news worldwide
165+ tools.
One conversation.
Everything appellate attorneys need from AI, connected to the assistant you already use. No extra apps, no switching tabs.
Appellate brief research sprint
When starting work on an appellate brief, systematically research controlling precedent, circuit splits, and scholarly authority before writing.
Cert petition strategy research
Before filing a petition for certiorari, research the issue's cert-worthiness, SCOTUS cert patterns, and amicus support landscape.
Frequently Asked Questions
How comprehensive is the case law database for federal circuit courts?
Legal Research covers all federal circuits from SCOTUS through district courts, with the full published opinion database. Unpublished opinions vary by circuit — some circuits make them searchable, others do not. For unpublished opinions in specific circuits, supplementing with direct PACER access is recommended.
Can the research tools identify cases that have been overruled or distinguished?
Yes. When you search for a specific case, Legal Research flags whether it has been overruled, distinguished by a higher court, or is subject to pending en banc review. This is critical for appellate work — citing a case that has been implicitly overruled can seriously undermine a brief.
How does the academic research tool access law review articles?
Academic Research searches millions of published papers including law review articles from major journals through open-access repositories, SSRN, and direct journal databases. Coverage is strongest for articles published in the last 10 years. For older seminal articles, the tool can find abstracts even when full text is paywalled.
Can I use these tools to track pending SCOTUS cases on specific legal issues?
Yes. Deep Research can surface information on pending cert petitions, oral argument schedules, and SCOTUS docket activity. Case Law can search for lower court decisions on the same legal issue to identify the trajectory of a doctrine as it heads toward SCOTUS review.
How useful are these tools for international and comparative law research?
Legal Research covers US, UK, Canadian, and several other common law jurisdiction courts. For civil law jurisdictions (Germany, France, EU courts), Deep Research and Academic Research can surface translated decisions and comparative law scholarship. Direct international court databases remain the best source for non-common-law jurisdictions.
Give your AI superpowers.
Get started for free
Works in Chat, Cowork and Code