Legal research and drafting you can actually cite.
Lawyer Brief is the AI workspace built for special education due process attorneys. Ask in plain language — or out loud — get answers grounded in real hearing decisions, and watch every citation get verified before it reaches a tribunal.
Purpose-built for IDEA · Citation-verified · Multi-model cross-check
Compensatory education is an equitable remedy meant to place the student where they would have been absent the denial of a free appropriate public education [1]. Courts apply a qualitative, fact-specific analysis rather than a strict hour-for-hour formula [2], measured against the student's individual needs [3].
General-purpose AI was never built to be cited.
Special education due process work runs on the record — hearing decisions, the IEP, the standard of review. Generic chatbots invent citations, miss the state-specific decisions that matter, and leave you to check everything by hand. The risk lands on the attorney.
Hallucinated citations
A confident answer with a case that doesn't exist is worse than no answer. Under Rule 3.3, that's your candor on the line.
Unsearchable decisions
The decisions that decide your case sit in scattered PDFs and state portals that keyword search can't reach.
Hours lost to drafting
Complaints and briefs get rebuilt from scratch each time, instead of starting from your own verified research.
Confidentiality exposure
Client facts pasted into a consumer tool are a Rule 1.6 problem the moment they leave your control.
One workspace for research, verification, and drafting.
Every part of Lawyer Brief shares the same grounded record, so an answer, the citation behind it, and the brief it becomes all trace back to the same source — with you reviewing each step.
Converse with AI
Ask in plain language and get answers grounded in real IDEA hearing decisions, retrieved with hybrid keyword and semantic search so the right precedent surfaces — not just the popular one.
Citation verification
Every citation in an answer is checked against the source corpus. Confirmed cases are marked verified; anything it can't confirm is flagged for your review — your Rule 3.3 candor, enforced in software.
Ask by voice, hear the answer
Dictate a question hands-free, then have the answer read back in a natural, near-human voice — while you're reading the file, between hearings, or away from the keyboard. Spoken questions run the same grounded research and citation checks as typed ones.
Multi-model consensus
High-stakes questions are answered by several independent models and cross-evaluated blind, so a single model's confident mistake doesn't become your filing.
Mock Courthouse
Pressure-test a theory before the hearing. Opposing AI agents argue both sides, surfacing the counterarguments and weak citations a hearing officer is likely to probe.
Drafting & export
Turn verified research into a draft due process complaint or brief, then export to Word to finish in the tools you already use — citations and all.
Research at the speed you think — out loud.
Special education attorneys spend their day in motion: reading a 60-page hearing decision, walking into a resolution session, driving between districts. Voice input lets you pose a research question the moment it occurs to you, without stopping to type.
Speak your question and Lawyer Brief runs it through the same grounded retrieval, citation verification, and — when you need it — multi-model cross-check as anything you'd type. Then it can read the answer back to you in a natural, near-human voice, so you can keep your eyes on the record. The convenience changes; the rigor doesn't.
- Speak your question — hands-free while you read the record
- Hear answers read back in a natural neural voice
- Every spoken question is still citation-verified
Why one model isn't enough for a filing.
Every large language model is confident — even when it's wrong. Ask the same question twice and you can get two different answers, and a single model will state a fabricated citation with the same certainty as a real one. For a brief you're going to sign, that's not a risk worth taking.
How consensus works: on a high-stakes question, Lawyer Brief sends it to several independent models — for example Claude, GPT-4o, and Grok. Each answers from the same retrieved record. The responses are then cross-evaluated blind, so no model knows which answer is its own, removing self-preference. Citations that can't be confirmed against the corpus are flagged as fabrications, and the system surfaces where the models agree and selects the best-supported answer — showing you the cross-check rather than asking you to trust it.
- Independent answers, not one model's guess
- Blind evaluation removes self-preference
- Fabricated citations flagged, agreement surfaced
Everyone sees exactly what their role should.
Lawyer Brief is multi-tenant and role-based. Each firm's workspace is isolated from every other firm, and within a firm, three roles draw clear lines around data, billing, and administration.
Lawyer
- Converse with AI, save briefs, and draft filings
- Sees only their own sessions and usage
- No billing internals or firm-wide administration
Firm Admin
- Invites and manages the firm's attorneys
- Sees the firm's spend — never platform cost or margin
- Scoped to their own tenant, never other firms
System Admin
- Provisions firms and configures the platform
- Sees platform-wide cost, margin, and health
- The only role with cross-tenant visibility
Five steps, one record.
The same grounded source follows your matter from the first question to the final export — nothing gets re-keyed, and nothing goes unverified.
Ingest the decisions
Your corpus of IDEA due process decisions is indexed for both exact-language and meaning-based search, so relevant precedent is findable even when the wording differs.
Ask — typed or spoken
Pose the question the way you'd ask a colleague. Lawyer Brief retrieves the supporting passages and answers from them, in a saved session you can return to.
Verify and cross-check
Each cited case is checked against the record; unconfirmed ones are flagged. For high-stakes questions, multiple models cross-evaluate the answer before you rely on it.
Draft from your research
Generate a complaint or brief that starts from the verified work you've already done, with the attorney reviewing and shaping every section.
Export and file
Send the draft to Word to finalize, with citations intact and a saved trail of the research behind it.
Built around special education practice.
Lawyer Brief is not a general legal tool with a special-ed setting. It's shaped end to end around IDEA due process and the people who litigate it.
Solo attorneys
Carry the research depth of a much larger firm without the overhead — find the controlling decision, verify it, and draft, in one place.
Due process boutiques
Standardize how your team researches and drafts, with shared sessions and per-role access so partners, associates, and staff each see the right view.
Advocacy organizations
Make rigorous, citation-backed analysis accessible to advocates supporting families through the due process system.
What makes it different.
Purpose-built for IDEA
Grounded in special education due process decisions, not a generic case-law dump. The retrieval, the prompts, and the workflow all assume IDEA practice.
Verifiable by design
Answers point back to real, checkable sources, and citations are confirmed or flagged. Trust is earned per citation, not assumed.
Attorney always in the loop
The platform researches and drafts; the lawyer decides. Nothing files itself, and the ethics gate makes that responsibility explicit.
Secure and ethical
Redaction, encryption, tenant isolation, and role-based access are built in — so using AI doesn't mean trading away confidentiality.
The guardrails the Model Rules expect.
Confidentiality, competence, candor, and supervision aren't afterthoughts here — they're wired into how the product works.
Encryption & tenant isolation
Sensitive data is encrypted and each firm's workspace is isolated, so one client's matters never bleed into another's.
Role-based access
System Admin, Firm Admin, and Lawyer roles each see only what their role should — billing, firm data, or their own work.
Recorded ethics acknowledgment
Before using the tool, each user acknowledges the Model Rules that govern AI-assisted research — recorded to their account and required, not optional.
Confidentiality-first inputs
Client identifiers are redacted before processing, reducing the exposure that comes from putting sensitive facts into a general-purpose model.
See Lawyer Brief on your own questions.
Bring a real research question from a current matter. We'll show you the answer, the verified citations behind it, and the draft it can become.