Responsible AI — Buyer Beware
Honest about what AI can and can't do.
AI can create real value in legal work. It can also fail in ways that matter. This page is our plain account of both — and the specific guardrails Litigit builds in.
Where AI genuinely helps
Potential gains — the upside, stated as potential, not as guaranteed outcomes.
Productivity
Automating routine reading, search, and drafting steps can free lawyer time for judgment.
Lower cost
Reducing manual effort on high-volume tasks can lower the cost of handling a matter.
Fewer errors
Consistent, documented processing can reduce certain kinds of manual error.
What AI reliably does well
The tasks where current AI is genuinely dependable.
Research
Reading and summarizing large volumes of text within a defined corpus.
Search
Finding relevant passages and surfacing related material quickly.
Grounded Q&A over a defined corpus
Answering questions from a known set of documents, with citations back to the source.
The risks — and how we mitigate them
The amber marker below is our reserved signal for AI output that requires human review.
| Risk | Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Hallucination | Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounded in the matter corpus, with source citations. |
| Undetected error | Uncertainty flags and an amber "requires review" marker, with a human in the loop. |
| Black-box / linear reasoning | Decision-support at each stage, backed by a transparent, documented process. |
| Loss of defensibility | Version-pinned record, audit trail, and a TAR process courts have accepted. |
| Confidentiality | Client-side confidentiality — deploy on client infrastructure. |
Requires review — Litigit reserves amber exclusively to mark AI-generated output that a person must check before it is relied upon. Where the system is uncertain, it says so, and a human makes the call.
We tell you what AI can't do.
Litigit takes the artificial out of AI.