Use Cases Legal AI

Your legal AI cited a case. Was it still good law?

Legal research agents retrieve precedents. Without temporal verification, they cite overruled cases.

Early access · Not certified for regulated production without independent compliance review.
Get API Key →

The Scenario

Legal research agent pulls a case from 2019. Looks perfect — same jurisdiction, similar facts. Agent includes it in the brief. Problem: case was overruled in 2024. Vector database had the embedding but no temporal validity marker. Brief goes to court with a dead citation.

Temporal validity catches what vector search misses.

• • • Case stored
Smith v. Jones (2019) — relevant precedent
✓ Stored · rct_dd42
valid_from: 2019-03-15
valid_to: 2024-08-22 ← OVERRULED
• • • Agent citing it
> Find precedent for negligence claim
⚠ TEMPORAL WARNING
Smith v. Jones found but overruled
Aug 2024 by Wilson v. State
Receipt rct_dd42 marked expired
Suggesting: Wilson v. State (2024)

Dead citations caught. Current law cited.

How It Fails

1. Stale citations

Vector search finds semantic matches, can't distinguish current vs overruled.

2. Conflicting interpretations

Two jurisdictions, same statute, both stored without conflict flag.

3. No research provenance

Partner asks "what sources did the agent review?" No structured record.

What You Get Back

✓ VERIFIED
receipt.json
{ "receipt_id": "rct_7f3a...", "assertion": "User prefers dark mode", "status": "verified", "confidence": 0.94, "signature": "ed25519:a8c3f1...", "verified_at": "2026-04-06T14:32:01Z", "chain_position": 42 }
0.01ms
Existence check
ed25519
Signed receipts
6
Retrieval channels
50k
Free assertions/mo

Works with

Related Use Cases

Start building with verified memory.

Free: 50,000 assertions/month. No credit card. No trial expiration.