Try Claude
Web ScraperScrape, crawl & extract web data
AI Tools for Attorneys
AI tools that help attorneys manage cases, research statutes, analyze contracts, and generate legal documents faster.
Get started for free
Works in Chat, Cowork and Code
CaseYearIssue
Bayo v. City of SF2024Title VII disparate impact
Hale v. Rivian2023ADA reasonable accommodation
Nguyen v. State2023ADEA mixed-motive claims
12 relevant cases · 9th Circuit 2020–present
Legal research and case law analysis
Search case law across jurisdictions and synthesize precedent. Build stronger arguments with cited authorities and identify conflicting precedent that opposing counsel might raise.
Find appellate decisions on punitive damages caps in wrongful termination cases across the 2nd, 5th, and 9th Circuits from the last 5 years.
Found 12 relevant appellate decisions. 2nd Circuit applies strict proportionality test (BMW v. Gore). 5th Circuit more permissive. 9th Circuit requires clear and convincing evidence. Compiled with headnotes.
ToolRouter search_cases
CircuitStandardKey case
2ndStrict proportionality (BMW v. Gore)Doe v. Employer Inc.
5thMore permissive — ratio up to 10:1 compensatorySmith v. Corp
9thClear and convincing evidence requiredNguyen v. BigCo
12 relevant decisions · 2020–present
Contract analysis and risk assessment
Extract key terms, identify missing provisions, and flag liability risks. Review contracts 10x faster with AI to catch dangerous language before signing.
Extract all indemnification, limitation of liability, and termination clauses from this partnership agreement. Flag any indemnification that flows both directions.
Extracted 7 indemnification clauses. Section 4.2 is mutual (good). Liability cap is $500K. Termination for cause poorly defined. Missing force majeure language.
ToolRouter extract_data
Indemnification
7 clauses found · Section 4.2 is mutual (acceptable)
Liability Cap
$500K — well below deal value, needs negotiation
Termination for Cause
Poorly defined — no objective criteria or cure period
Force Majeure
Missing entirely — significant gap given supply chain risks
Legal document generation
Generate templates for motions, demand letters, retainer agreements, and discovery responses. Customize for your jurisdiction and practice.
Draft a motion to compel discovery responses that are incomplete and evasive in a contract dispute in federal court.
Generated motion with three grounds: interrogatory responses lack specificity, document requests answered with boilerplate objections, admission responses improper. Includes case citations.
ToolRouter repurpose_content
Ground 1: Interrogatories
Responses lack specificity — evasive and incomplete per FRCP 37(a)(4)
Ground 2: Document Requests
Boilerplate objections without proper privilege log
Ground 3: Admissions
Improper denial responses — fact not genuinely disputed
Relief Sought
Compel full responses within 14 days + attorney fees under FRCP 37
Opposing counsel and expert vetting
Search for disciplinary history, prior sanctions, expert qualifications, and professional credentials. Identify red flags before opposing counsel motions.
Research the opposing counsel attorney and their firm. Look for disciplinary actions, sanctions history, and settlement outcomes in similar cases.
Found 2 bar complaints (resolved 2019, 2021). Firm has 12 sanctions in last decade. Settlement rates: 68% below demand. Recent malpractice claim trending.
ToolRouter deep_search
Bar Complaints
2 resolved complaints (2019, 2021) — no discipline imposed
Firm Sanctions
12 sanctions over 10 years — 3 under current lead partner
Settlement Pattern
68% settle below plaintiff demand — aggressive posture, low follow-through
Current Risk
Pending malpractice claim SDNY 2024 — monitor for case impact
Regulatory compliance monitoring
Track enforcement actions, regulatory changes, and agency guidance in your practice area. Stay ahead of compliance requirements.
Monitor all SEC enforcement actions for the past 90 days targeting financial advisors. What are common violations?
Found 14 SEC actions. Top violations: inadequate disclosure (64%), unsuitable recommendations (57%), failure to maintain compliance (43%). Settled amounts: $200K-$8M.
ToolRouter search_actions
Total Actions
14 SEC actions targeting registered investment advisors
Top Violation
Inadequate disclosure — 64% of cases
Unsuitable Recommendations
57% of cases included suitability failures
Settlement Range
$200K–$8M · median $1.4M · most included disgorgement
Ready-to-use prompts
Research case law
Search for appellate decisions on attorney malpractice standards in your state. Focus on cases involving missed deadlines and statute of limitations.
Analyze contract risk
Review this vendor agreement and extract all termination clauses, liability limits, indemnification provisions, and non-compete language.
Draft legal document
Generate a professional cease-and-desist letter for trademark infringement, including demand for destruction of infringing materials and damages claim.
Vet opposing counsel
Research this attorney's background: bar discipline, prior sanctions, malpractice claims, and record in similar litigation.
Monitor regulatory actions
Get all FTC enforcement actions from the past year targeting e-commerce companies. What violations are most common?
Search statutes
Find all statutes of limitations for breach of contract claims across multiple jurisdictions (CA, NY, TX, FL).
Tools to power your best work
Content RepurposerTurn any content into posts, scripts, and articles
Deep ResearchAI research reports with citations
Regulatory ActionsSEC, CFPB, FDIC & Federal Register
Economic CalendarEarnings, IPOs, FOMC & events
People SearchFind anyone across 500+ sites
Company LookupCompany data for UK, US & EU
Legal ResearchCase law, statutes, regulations & legislation worldwide
165+ tools.
One conversation.
Everything attorneys need from AI, connected to the assistant you already use. No extra apps, no switching tabs.
Case intake and evaluation
Evaluate a new case by researching applicable law, assessing opposing party background, and drafting initial demand or complaint.
Contract due diligence
Comprehensive contract review for M&A or vendor management with risk assessment and negotiation strategy.
Regulatory compliance review
Monitor regulatory environment, assess compliance gaps, and update policies based on recent enforcement trends.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can AI legal research replace legal databases like Westlaw?
AI tools like Legal Research complement databases like Westlaw. They excel at synthesizing information across multiple sources and identifying patterns, but always verify citations in official legal databases for briefs and court filings.
Is AI-generated legal content admissible in court?
Legal documents generated by AI can be used as templates and starting points, but they must be thoroughly reviewed, customized for your jurisdiction, and signed by a licensed attorney. You remain responsible for accuracy and compliance.
How do I maintain attorney-client privilege with AI tools?
Use AI tools that comply with security and confidentiality standards. Avoid inputting highly sensitive client information without review of the tool's data handling policies. Consider using tools with secure, encrypted connections and audit trails.
What compliance risks should I monitor?
Stay informed about regulatory actions in your practice area using monitoring tools. Key areas: data privacy (CCPA, GDPR), anti-money laundering (AML), sanctions screening, and industry-specific regulations relevant to your clients.
How accurate is contract analysis AI?
AI contract analysis tools are excellent for extraction and pattern recognition but should always be reviewed by a qualified attorney. They may miss context-specific nuances or jurisdictional variations that could affect enforceability.
Give your AI superpowers.
Get started for free
Works in Chat, Cowork and Code