An opinion that tells you what it does not know.
Seven phases, a deliberately adversarial counter-pass and a final edit that reads all sections together. Every statutory citation is checked against the official wording, every verbatim quote against the stored page excerpt — and whatever stays open is in the opinion, not in the small print.
The brief first, then the research
The AI turns your question into a research brief and puts it in front of you: question, scope, depth. The run starts only once you confirm it — and only then do costs arise.
- You read the brief verbatim before anything runs.
- Three depths — from a tightly framed question to targeted counter-research per objection.
- Works inside a matter just as well as a free-standing legal question.
- Question: validity of a termination under § 626 BGB
- Scope: without works council hearing, without social selection
- Depth: detailed — 10 sub-questions, with counter-check
Seven phases instead of one call
A single deep-research call is not an opinion. What runs here is an orchestrated process across many work steps, each with its own checkpoint — if something breaks off, the run resumes there instead of starting over.
- Gathering follows a fixed order: our own body of statutes first, then your matter, then the web.
- The run works in the background; you get an email as soon as it is done.
- The finished opinion lands in the matter's document store as PDF and Word.
- BriefYour approval
- Plan: 10 sub-questions
- Gather: statutes → matter → web
- Counter-check
- ›Writing
A pass that works against its own result
After gathering, a dedicated and deliberately adversarial pass looks for contradictions between sources and missing counter-positions. For every objection that needs a source, targeted counter-research is started.
- Contradictions are named, not smoothed over.
- Whatever stays open goes into the “Open questions” section — not into the bin.
- Prevailing view not evidenced → counter-research started
- Source older than the statutory amendment → checked
- No counter-position found → open, noted in the opinion
What the opinion does not know
Every opinion carries a mandatory section “Open questions and limits of this research”. And if nothing stayed open, it says explicitly that this does not mean there is nothing.
- A citation marker pointing nowhere is visibly devalued to [?] rather than deleted — a deleted marker would make the sentence look as if it had never claimed a source.
- Facts from the matter appear in the source list separately from statutes and decisions: a fact establishes what happened — never what the law is.
- Quotes that could not be found again and unconfirmed statutory citations are listed individually.
- 2 sub-questions without a solid source
- 1 statutory citation not confirmed against the official wording
- 1 objection from the counter-check remained open
- 3 paragraphs without their own source
The same legal question, several matters
The same legal question rarely comes up only once. A finished opinion can be copied into another matter — without paying for it twice.
- The copy deliberately inherits no costs: those belong to the original.
- Only finished opinions appear in the catalogue — quoting from half of one would be an invitation to error.
- The AI assistant knows the catalogue and reads one passage on demand instead of putting 30 pages into the prompt.
- Opinion: termination under § 626 BGB
- Target matter: Müller v. Schmidt GmbH
- Copied: the verified summary together with its confirmed sources
One call is not an opinion
A single deep-research request returns a text. What is produced here is a work product with a source list, verification notes and an explicit list of what stayed open — created by an agent that runs, like every other, under your approval and your quota.
See all agentsAgents in this workflow
Runs the seven-phase job: brief, plan, gather, counter-check, write, final edit, verify.
Additionally checks the citations in the result against our own body of statutes.
Control & safety
- Costs arise only after you have approved the research brief.
- A citation marker without a source is visibly devalued, not silently deleted.
- Every web source is archived on retrieval and the quote verified on the page.
- Every opinion carries a mandatory section “Open questions and limits”.
Let your case files think along.
The AI lawyer portal — EU-hosted, profession-compliant, client-separated. You keep control, the AI does the groundwork.