Judicial analytics
Examine time to disposition, settlement and dismissal rates, motion grant rates, case mix and the attorneys who appear before a judge most often.
Explore judgesOne workspace for litigation
Six independent models.
One connected practice.
Crebral began with six independent AI researchers answering the same legal question, then checking their citations and holdings against primary records. Today, that research sits alongside discovery, court intelligence, an assistant, drafting and practice management. All connected to your matters.
Primary records. Visible coverage.
Florida court records collected from Miami-Dade, Lee, Collier, Charlotte and Broward; reporter citations from Free Law Project; jury instructions from The Florida Bar. Counts refresh daily. Unavailable sources show the dated last-known snapshot.
- Court cases
- 679,023
- Counted ·
- Docket entries
- 22,700,000
- Last known ·
- Reporter citations
- 16,307,428
- Last known ·
- Judge scorecards
- 225
- Counted ·
01 / Verified research
An answer you can inspect.
Choose a jurisdiction and ask a question. Full Consensus runs seven stages, exposing each researcher’s answer, citation checks, holding checks, dissent and an audit trail.
Quick research uses one model and checks citations against Crebral’s reporter-citation index. Guided research turns a structured intake into a Full Consensus question.
Stage 1
Case discovery
Search Crebral’s case-law index for citations, case names and topics, with CourtListener as a fallback.
Stage 2
Independent research
Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, xAI, DeepSeek and Inception answer in parallel without seeing each other’s work.
Stage 3
Citation existence
Every citation is looked up in Crebral’s own index of 16.3 million reporter citations first, and in CourtListener only when the index has no match. Citations that cannot be verified are flagged.
Stage 4
Holding verification
Anthropic and OpenAI independently extract the holding from the opinion. DeepSeek compares those readings with the researcher’s claim.
Stage 5
Good-law signals
Scan the opinions that cite each case for overruling, reversal, criticism and distinguishing language. When nothing can be retrieved the citation is marked unknown, never good law. This is a keyword check, not yet a citator graph.
Stage 6
Consensus
Classify which researchers reached the same conclusion. Agreement is counted from that cluster, dissent is recorded, and the lead answer comes from inside the agreeing group with the citations they share.
Stage 7
Adversarial review
A separate agent challenges citations, holdings, jurisdiction, timing, counterarguments and logic, and recommends the next review step.
Review the underlying authority before relying on an answer. Good-law signals are limited to the citing opinions retrieved.
02 / Easy Discovery
The first read is done. The decisions are yours.
Describe the parties, issues and counsel once. Upload files, paste a Dropbox share link, or select matter documents. Discovery reads against that case profile and brings the review back to your matter.
Every document gets a first reading, and a stronger model revisits the ones that look privileged, hot or uncertain. Both reads are kept.
Four stacks for the review
- Needs your decision
- Privilege log, grouped by counsel
- Hot
- Everything else
Ask about a set, save findings as collections, export chronology and privilege-log sheets, or send a draft into the Writing Copilot. The privilege log exports with your decisions overriding the model’s in every column.
03 / Court intelligence
Know the record before the hearing.
Judge, counsel and expert profiles built from Florida Clerk-of-Court dockets and filings. Disposition and outcome rates are arithmetic over the records, with rule-based inferences labelled as approximate.
Opposing counsel and firms
Review appearances and indicative outcomes by judge, case type and county. Firm families connect name variants. Claim your own record to correct firm and contact details.
Explore attorneys- Attorney profiles
- 31,988
- Counted ·
- Case-counsel links
- 239,222
- Counted ·
- Firms
- 4,837
- Counted ·
- Expert witnesses
- 297
- Counted ·
- Jury instructions
- 993
- Counted ·
- Verdict forms
- 54
- Counted ·
Expert witnesses
Find credentials, fields and case appearances extracted from filings, with retaining parties and quoted source excerpts.
Jury instructions and court rules
Search Florida Standard Jury Instructions and model verdict forms. Court formatting rules support document export.
04 / Assistant
Start with “this matter.”
The assistant reads the page you are on: a matter, document, research result, bill or draft. Ask about that work without repeating the context. On a matter, it knows the discovery sets and documents waiting for a decision.
- Research in context. Answers draw on the firm’s knowledge base, case law and relevant judge, attorney or firm records.
- Move into drafting. A drafting request opens the document-type picker; Brief Builder gathers research notes for the Writing Copilot.
- Keep the conversation. Conversations are saved per matter.
Assistant answers use a single model with retrieval. The six-model Full Consensus pipeline runs on the Research page.
05 / Drafting + Writing Copilot
From the record to a draft you control.
Start with built-in document outlines or your firm’s templates. Draft from a research result to carry its verified citations into the document, then review changes in the Writing Copilot.
Edit with authority
Cite Authority proposes citations checked for existence. Strengthen, Bluebook Check and Counter-Argument return pending edits for you to accept or reject.
Export your work
Export Word with native tracked changes, plain Word or PDF. Court-formatted Word and PDF use the platform’s court rules.
Build firm knowledge
Tabular Reviews apply questions across documents with citation checks per cell. Research and drafting feed your citation library and knowledge base.
06 / Practice management
The matter holds it all together.
Keep research, documents, discovery, contacts, deadlines, notes, time and bills attached to the matter. Organization members share the workspace, with clients and leads alongside it.
- Time and billing
- Enter or dictate time, manage rates and expenses, create invoices with PDF output, and track trust deposits, disbursements and retainers.
- Calendar and reporting
- Track deadlines and review template-based deadline sets. Financial, productivity and trust reports export to CSV. Deadline templates require attorney review.
- Client portal
- Give clients separate credentials for invoices, shared documents, appointments and messages. Track CLE and pro bono work in the firm workspace.
Your firm’s work stays your firm’s.
- Per-organization isolation
- Encryption at rest
- No training on client data
Bring the work back to your matter.
Research, review, draft and manage your practice in one workspace.