AI

An AI case retrieval tool that returns real court opinions with the relevant passages marked. It retrieves rather than generates, so there's nothing to hallucinate. Free to start.

Sam Davidoff, founder and CEO of Align, discusses leaving Williams & Connolly to pursue legal tech full time and develop an AI legal research tool solely focused on surfacing U.S. case law.

Can we make legal research AI stop hallucinating? The answer is yes – and it’s how attorneys approach legal research with their associates.

Align Research replaces hours of case-law research with a fixed, per-task cost

Align Research replaces hours of case-law research with a fixed, per-task cost

Learn how to create a digital trial binder faster in 2026. Build once, drag and drop documents, and update in real time with Align's digital case binder platform.

Not every tool that shows up for “trial preparation software” was built for how litigators work. Here is a clear breakdown of six tools across four categories, and which one fits the full litigation workflow.

Firms that buy first and ask questions later get a fraction of the value. Firms that diagnose first capture nearly all of it.

A stage-by-stage guide to going paperless for trial. Where paper accumulates in litigation and how to replace physical binders with a digital trial binder at every phase from case intake through courtroom presentation.

The category of work clients are unwilling to pay for is expanding. What billing guidelines started, AI expectations will accelerate. Firms that haven’t addressed the coordination layer won’t just absorb the current cost

Binders are everywhere in litigation. Like water, they seem to seep into every nook and cranny of the litigation workflow. Binders line our bookshelves, cover our desks, and fill our suitcases.

Litigation is now digital, but is it more efficient?

Don’t “chat” with AI like a junior lawyer. Long conversations degrade results. When output slips, start a new chat: rephrase, add context, or break the task into smaller steps.

LLMs summarize well but default to average analysis. That makes them useful for baseline work, but not a substitute for the fresh, above-average insight junior lawyers often provide.

Delegating legal work to LLMs can save time but costs learning. Prefer: you read/outline; AI summarizes and fills tedious parts. Ask not only “can AI do it?” but “am I OK not doing it?”

LegalTech favors “direct” AI control, but its benefits are shrinking as frontier LLMs improve at prompting, workflows, and security. The “inverted” model is viable and likely to gain adoption despite vendor resistance.

Frontier AI models improve so fast that studies comparing them to legal-specific AI become outdated almost immediately. Retesting recent benchmarks shows general models already match or exceed earlier reported gaps.

Lawyers’ claims that AI makes them more efficient may be unreliable. Evidence shows people often misjudge AI’s impact on their own productivity. Firms should rely on objective data, not self-reported impressions, when de