Examples of such technical innovation might be in Judicata, Casetext, recipient of the AALL's award for new product of the year, which recently launched
CARA Brief Finder and others, providing competition against the old guard.
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Casetext was clearly on to something with
its CARA brief - analysis software.
CARA Brief Finder makes finding these invaluable resources effortless.»
Casetext is calling this new feature
CARA Brief Finder.
Not exact matches
Although I have not tried
CARA's
Brief Finder, I was given a preview demonstration of it a few weeks ago when I was in San Francisco.
After hearing about EVA, the folks at Casetext — who have their own
brief analyzer,
CARA — challenged ROSS -LSB-...]
With today's release of
Brief Finder,
CARA's analysis finds not only relevant cases, but also briefs that are relevant to the legal and factual issues in a given document.
Both updates involve Casetext's artificial - intelligence,
brief - analysis software
CARA (Case Analysis Research Assistant):
Upload a
brief, memorandum or any other document that contains legal text, and
CARA analyzes it and generates a list of relevant cases that are not mentioned in the document.
This means that if you have a scanned version of a
brief or document, you need to OCR it before uploading it to
CARA.
Take a rough draft of a
brief you've written, or even the final product, and load it into
CARA to see what other cases it finds — and you missed.
After hearing about EVA, the folks at Casetext — who have their own
brief analyzer,
CARA — challenged ROSS to participate in a «robot fight» here at Legaltech / Legalweek in New York, where both companies are participating.
However, Clerk goes well beyond
CARA, not only identifying missing cases but also analyzing the strength of a
brief's citations and arguments in granular detail and suggesting ways to improve them.
Comparisons will inevitably be made between Judicata's Clerk and
CARA, the
brief - analysis tool introduced last year by Casetext that finds cases that are relevant to a legal document but not cited in it.
With Casetext
CARA, for example, you can toss a
brief in the virtual hopper and get back a list of cases that are relevant but not cited — the ones your opponent couldn't distinguish or (on a draft, we hope) the ones you missed in your first round of research.
The standard way to use
CARA is for an attorney who has received a
brief, memoranda or other legal document to upload it to
CARA, and
CARA then performs its analysis and generates a list of relevant cases that are not mentioned in the document.
Instead,
CARA analyzes the citations and the text of the
brief to find other relevant cases.
Just drag and drop a
brief and
CARA will give you a list of cases on point.
But
CARA does more than just look at citations; it analyzes the
brief to home in on possibly relevant decisions.
This sounds to be essentially the same as
CARA, which also allows you to upload a
brief or memorandum and find relevant cases not mentioned in the document.
The idea of uploading your
brief to start your research isn't entirely new, but
CARA seems to be the only tool focused on recommending cases based on a holistic analysis of your document.
However, legal tech blogger Bob Ambrogi writes today that Casetext — who have their own
brief analyser
CARA — challenged EVA to a head to head robot war and ROSS declined: Casetext conducted it anyway.
Carolyn Elefant stated, «[I'm excited about] new legal research products like CaseText's
CARA that take a new approach to legal research — I can't wait to have it scrape the cases from a
brief so I can have them all at my fingertips at oral argument.»