HiCourt

Quality over speed. Built for the matters where being right is the point.

Hand it the
matter.
It does
the work.

Pick the task, say what you need and drop in the matter’s files: a research memo, an assessment, a summary, a chronology, a comparison of two versions, a proofread filing, or a citation check of a draft you already wrote. It comes back in Word, text or a spreadsheet, ready for a lawyer to review, verify and sign.

Our system produces better results because nothing it cites is taken on trust. The cases it relies on are looked up in the published case law and checked by a separate stage that wrote none of the work. Anything flagged goes back to be fixed and is checked again, and whatever is still open is marked for your lawyer.

And it works from your firm’s own library: the files you add are read and indexed, and the past work the person asking is allowed to see is put to use, never shared outside your firm.

A lawyer at your firm reads it, checks it, and signs it. That does not change.

What it actually does The deck → For your team →

The whole thing, on one picture

Click it to open it full size, since it is built to be walked through a step at a time.

What HiCourt does with a matter, end to end. Your firm's library: you choose the task, say what you need and add the matter's files; each file is read and indexed before a run can use it; ethical walls and matter permissions are applied first; for research and analysis, the firm's permitted past work is recalled and labelled. The work and a separate check on it: the work is drafted from your request, your files and the permitted past work; the cases it cites are looked up in the published case law, a lookup rather than a guess; a separate checking stage that wrote none of the work tests each case against the claim it supports; flagged citations go back to be fixed and are checked again, in a bounded loop. The finish: one finished document in the form you asked for; its claims are checked again and it is checked against the request; it reaches your lawyer for review and signature; every finished run is filed into the firm's memory for later matters, only where the person asking may see it. Checking a draft you already wrote returns a table without rewriting it. Still to come: quotation and pinpoint checks, and whether a case is still good law. CLICK TO EXPAND
The whole run, end to end: your firm's library, the work and the checks on it, and the finish.

Three reasons a firm would choose this

What a firm gets here that a general-purpose AI tool does not give it.

The thing that checks it is not the thing that wrote it

The cases the work relies on are looked up in the published case law. A case that cannot be found is flagged, not assumed. Then a separate checking stage, which wrote none of the work, reads the opinion itself and tests whether it supports the claim it is cited for. Uncertain results stay visible instead of being smoothed over.

A general AI tool will confirm an invented case if you ask it whether the case is real. HiCourt never asks: it looks the case up.

Anything flagged goes back to be fixed, and you are told what is still open

A flagged citation goes back to be corrected or withdrawn, and the fix is checked again. The run records why the loop stopped, and anything still flagged stays flagged.

When the document is finished, its cited claims are checked once more and it is checked against what you asked for. Every claim carries a status, including “not checked”, so your lawyer knows exactly where to look.

It works from your firm's library

Files you add are read and indexed. For research and analysis, the firm’s past work is recalled too, each item labelled as reviewed or not and as clean or with known problems. It informs the work; it never replaces checking the law.

Every finished run is filed back into the firm’s memory, and a lawyer’s signed review updates it, so the library gets more useful with each matter. Permissions come first: ethical walls and matter membership decide what a run can draw on, before anything is searched.

The three arrangements, and what each costs you →

What is not checked yet. Checks cover case citations. Quotations and pinpoint pages are not checked yet, nor is whether a case is still good law, and statutes, regulations, court rules and treatises are not looked up. Your lawyer still reads the sources.

What it does

Three things. Nothing else.

It does the work

Research memos, assessments, summaries, chronologies, comparisons, proofread filings, first drafts, memos to the file and hearing preparation, in Word or text, with spreadsheets where the work has rows.

It writes one finished document

What survived the checks, and every flag still open, goes into one document in the form you asked for. If a run cannot finish, it keeps what it has and labels it incomplete; nothing is dressed up as done.

Then citation-linked text is checked

The finished document’s cited claims go back through the checks, and a separate check asks whether it does what you asked. Findings are reported to your lawyer, beside the sentences they affect; they never quietly rewrite the document.

Why step 3 exists: AI invents cases that do not exist, and on the page they look exactly like real ones. It will also confirm an invented case if you ask it whether the case is real. So we never ask.

How it works

Your lawyer is the first step and the last one. Everything between is the product.

  1. Your lawyer says what they need done

    Pick the task, say what you need in your own words and add the matter’s files. Each file is read and indexed, and shows as ready before a run can use it. If a file seems to contradict a choice made on the form, the choice wins, and the run records it.

    For research and analysis, the firm’s permitted past work is recalled too, labelled so your lawyer can see where it came from.

  2. HiCourt does the work

    It works from a close reading of your request, your files and the permitted past work, and it looks for what hurts your position as well as what helps it.

  3. The cases it cites are looked up and checked

    Each case is looked up in the published case law, and a case that cannot be found is flagged. A separate checking stage, which wrote none of the work, reads the opinion and tests it against the claim it is cited for. Uncertain results stay visible.

  4. Anything flagged goes back to be fixed

    A flagged citation goes back to be corrected or withdrawn, and the fix is checked again. The loop is bounded, the run records why it stopped, and anything still flagged stays flagged for your lawyer. A citation check of a draft you pasted in never rewrites it.

  5. It is written up as one document

    In the form you asked for. Flags sit against the sentences they affect, not buried at the end.

  6. Then the finished document is checked too

    Its cited claims go back through the checks, and a separate check asks whether it does what you asked. Every claim carries a status, including “not checked”. Findings are reported, never used to rewrite the document.

  7. Every finished run is filed into the firm’s memory

    Automatically. A lawyer’s signed review makes a new version of it. Later work can draw on it, but only where the person asking is allowed to see it.

    Past work informs new work. It never substitutes for checking the law afresh.

  8. A lawyer at your firm reviews and signs it

    Always. It produces drafting support. It does not give legal advice, does not file anything, and cannot be the last reader.

Your staff will want more than this. A worked example, the security architecture and every limitation are on the detailed page.

What comes back

The finished document. Everything below is an annotation on it, not a substitute for it.

Invented example. Made up for this page, not a real result.

A memo on whether a limitation-of-liability clause survives an allegation of gross negligence.

The document comes with the status of each case it relies on. Here is what those statuses mean for your lawyer’s review.

No contradiction recorded

The case was found and the check found nothing against the claim. Quotations, pinpoints and whether it is still good law are not checked yet, so your lawyer still reads the source.

Sent back, then cleared

It was flagged, went back to be fixed, and the recheck found nothing against it. The record shows what changed. A clean row is not a legal certification.

Still open

What the system could not settle on its own, including any statement of law asserted with no case attached to it at all. It may well be right. Nothing in the work supports it.

Your lawyer's review time goes to what is still open.
Instead of being spread evenly across everything the document cited.

Your firm's library

Permitted work from your firm’s library

This is the part that compounds, and the part where a firm will want to know exactly where its files are sitting.

Ask questions using the documents in your library and the firm’s prior work, limited to what the person asking is allowed to see.

Nothing from your library is shared with any other firm, pooled with anyone else's work, or used to improve anything outside your office. It exists to make your firm's own material usable by your firm.

Where the library sits

The trade here is simple: the more you spread it out, the safer it feels and the less it can answer. A library only works across everything it can see.

Option A

A private store we run for you

Encrypted storage on our infrastructure, dedicated to your firm alone.

Where the files sit
In a private store used by your firm and no other customer. Encrypted at rest, with the hosting provider, location and terms named in writing before you upload anything.
Who can reach it
Your office. Our own access would be none by default, with any support access requested, logged and time-limited.
What it gives you
The full library, available to the whole office from anywhere, backed up and maintained without your firm running anything.
What you give up
Your files are on someone else's hardware. You are trusting the arrangement and the contract rather than owning the disk.

Option B

A machine in your office

Drives your firm owns, in your building, holding the whole library.

Where the files sit
On that machine, in your office. Nowhere else.
Who can reach it
Your office, over your own network. There is no copy for anyone else to hold.
What it gives you
The full library, shared across the office, on hardware you can physically point at.
What you give up
Your firm owns the machine, the backups, the replacement drive when one fails, and the physical security of the room it is in.

Option C

On each person's own computer

Nothing pooled. Each machine holds only its own work.

Where the files sit
On the individual workstation they were uploaded from.
Who can reach it
Whoever uses that computer.
What it gives you
The tightest containment of the three, and the simplest answer to "where is that file".
What you give up
Most of the point. A library split across twelve machines cannot be asked one question, and the system cannot draw on what the firm collectively knows. Worth choosing deliberately, not by default.

Today HiCourt runs as Option A: each firm gets its own private hosted environment. Options B and C are not offered yet.

The question a firm should ask before any of that

Who can see what. Permissions are applied before anything is searched: ethical walls, matter membership and sealed matters decide what a run can draw on. What a person may not see is not searched, recalled, shown or used in their work.

Every run keeps a protected record of what it did, readable only by people who are still allowed to see it. Drafting and checking use commercial AI, so the text of the work is sent out for processing; nothing is sent that the person asking may not see.

How we talk about your data

Each firm runs in its own dedicated hosted environment. The other placements are not offered yet, and we will not describe them as available until they are.

Specificity instead of assurance. That is a deliberate choice, and it is the same reason this page tells you which parts of the design involve a trade rather than presenting a menu with a right answer on it.

What holds, in every arrangement

  • yours alone The library belongs to one office. It is never pooled with another firm's, and never used to improve anything outside your firm.
  • not yet Office-machine and workstation placement are not offered yet.
  • in place Permissions are applied before anything is searched, and a run draws only on what the person asking may see.
  • not yet Deleting a file everywhere it has been copied, backups included, is not finished yet.

Where your lawyer stays in charge

Deliberate, and worth stating plainly, because the opposite is what usually gets sold.

  • The judgement stays with your lawyer. HiCourt records what it checked and what it could not. Quotations, pinpoints and whether a case is still good law are not checked yet. Your lawyer verifies the sources, reviews the work and decides what the law means for the client.
  • It shows its findings and its limits. Every claim in the document carries a status and anything still open is marked, so your lawyer reviews the work and the sources instead of trusting it.
  • It writes; it does not act. It produces files for attorney review. It does not sign, file or send anything.
  • It does not put a number on itself. You will not find a success rate or an accuracy figure anywhere here, because nobody has measured one. What you get instead is the record of what was checked, what was fixed, and what is still open. That is the thing a partner can actually act on — and if we ever do publish a figure, the standard we are holding ourselves to is that somebody other than us has to have graded it.

What it costs

We have not settled this yet.

A flat annual fee, a charge per lawyer, a charge per matter, or usage-based, and all four are live options. Each suits a different kind of firm, and we would rather ask a few firms than announce a number and defend it afterwards.

What is decided: your firm sets a hard spending limit and the system stops there rather than sending a surprise, and nothing is charged before something is delivered.

Tell us how your firm would want to be billed and that genuinely decides it.

Would your firm use this?

We want to know whether this is worth building, and what it would have to do before a firm like yours would let it in the door. No, because… is the most useful answer we can get.

Please don't send anything about a client or a matter. HiCourt LLC is the company behind this page, and a working version runs privately for one test firm behind a login; this form is not it. It simply opens your own email program.