Case Materials Dashboard

Navigate through the complete lifecycle of a client matter, from initial intake through appeal. At each stage, you will evaluate available tools—AI and non-AI—select an appropriate approach, execute the work, and verify the results.

Learning Objectives

  • Select appropriate tools for legal tasks. Evaluate whether AI, templates, traditional methods, or a hybrid approach best serves the client's interests—including recognizing when AI is not the appropriate choice.
  • Evaluate tools against alternatives. Assess AI tools' strengths and limitations for specific applications, compare them to non-AI alternatives, and make reasoned judgments about when AI adds value versus when it introduces unnecessary risk or inefficiency.
  • Protect confidential information. Analyze confidentiality implications across all tools (not only AI), apply appropriate safeguards, and make informed decisions about what information can be used with which tools.
  • Execute verification protocols. Apply verification methods appropriate to the tool and task—including citation checking, fact verification, and source validation—and calibrate verification rigor to the risk level of the work product.
  • Document tool-assisted processes. Maintain records of your tool selection, use, and verification sufficient to satisfy professional responsibility obligations and support supervisory review.

Confidentiality Instructions

Treat this fictitious matter as though it were real. Before using any tool with client information, apply the same confidentiality analysis you would in practice:

  • What information does this tool require me to input?
  • Where does that information go? Who can access it?
  • Does the tool's data retention policy protect client confidentiality?
  • Would I be comfortable explaining this tool choice to my client? To the bar?

Phase 1 Distribution 1: Initial Client Information

Your client, GreenLeaf Technologies, has come to you with a software contract dispute. Review these initial materials to understand the facts and prepare for client counseling.

Client Intake Form

Initial information gathered during client intake, including contact details, matter description, and key dates.

View Document

Software Development Agreement

The contract between GreenLeaf and Vertex Solutions, including specifications in Exhibit A.

View Document

Email Correspondence

Seven emails between the parties documenting the dispute as it developed.

View Document

Testing Documentation

GreenLeaf's internal testing showing software defects with specific error rates and crash logs.

View Document

Legal Research Assignment

Research Texas law on contract interpretation, material breach, and remedies—comparing AI and traditional research approaches.

View Assignment

Tool Selection Opportunities — Phase 1

For each task, consider: What tools could accomplish this? What are the tradeoffs? Document your reasoning.

Contract Review & Analysis
Non-AI Options
  • Use a contract review checklist from Practical Law, Lexis Practice Advisor, or a secondary source to systematically work through each provision
  • Compare against form contracts or model agreements to identify non-standard terms
  • Manual close reading with issue-spotting based on your contracts knowledge
AI Options (Tools You Have)
  • Westlaw CoCounsel: Can analyze contracts to identify key clauses and flag potential issues within your firm's privileged environment
  • Lexis Protégé: Document analysis features can compare against standard terms
  • Gemini/Copilot: Could assist with general contract concepts—but consider: can you use these with client documents? What are the confidentiality implications?
Selection Considerations
  • Confidentiality: Can you input this contract into the tool? What is the tool's data retention policy?
  • Task characteristics: Is this a novel contract requiring judgment, or routine review where AI efficiency helps?
  • Your development: Which approach builds skills you need? Sometimes manual review teaches more.
  • Risk profile: How high-stakes is this contract? Does that affect your tool choice?
✓ Verification Checkpoint

Whatever tool you use: Did you verify key clauses against the contract language itself? Did you confirm AI-flagged issues actually exist? Did you check for issues the tool might have missed?

Timeline Construction
Non-AI Options
  • Create a manual chronology by reading documents and extracting dates into a table or timeline
  • Use a spreadsheet to organize events chronologically
  • Physical timeline on paper or whiteboard for visual analysis
AI Options (Tools You Have)
  • Westlaw CoCounsel: Can extract dates and events from documents to build chronologies
  • Lexis Protégé: Document analysis can identify key dates and organize facts
  • Gemini/Copilot: Could help organize information—but what client facts would you need to share? Is that appropriate?
Selection Considerations
  • Volume: For seven emails, is AI faster—or would manual review be just as quick and more thorough?
  • Accuracy needs: Timelines often become exhibits or support motions. How reliable must dates be?
  • Confidentiality: Timeline construction requires inputting client facts. Which tools can you use?
✓ Verification Checkpoint

Did you verify each date against the source document? Did you check for events the tool might have missed? Are events characterized accurately?

Legal Research
Non-AI Options
  • Traditional Boolean/terms-and-connectors searching on Westlaw or Lexis
  • Secondary sources: Texas Jurisprudence, Dorsaneo's Texas Litigation Guide, O'Connor's Texas Causes of Action
  • Texas Pattern Jury Charges for element analysis
  • Restatement (Second) of Contracts for general principles
AI Options (Tools You Have)
  • Westlaw CoCounsel: AI-assisted research can synthesize case law and identify relevant authority
  • Lexis Protégé: AI search features can help navigate unfamiliar areas of law
  • Gemini/Copilot: Can explain general legal concepts—but can they provide reliable, citable Texas authority? What are the risks?
Selection Considerations
  • Familiarity: Are you learning a new area (where AI synthesis helps orient you) or refining knowledge (where precision matters)?
  • Citation reliability: General-purpose LLMs hallucinate citations. Legal research platforms cite real cases—but do they cite the best cases?
  • Completeness: How do you know your research is thorough? What did the AI miss?
✓ Verification Checkpoint

Did you verify every citation using KeyCite or Shepard's? Did you read the cases yourself—not just the AI summary? Did you search for contrary authority?

Looking Ahead: Specialized Tools

As you work with general-purpose tools, note their limitations. Specialized contract analysis tools (like Kira, Luminance, or Evisort) and litigation support tools claim to address some of these limitations. When you encounter vendor demonstrations later in the course, consider:

  • What limitations did I experience with general tools that this specialized tool claims to solve?
  • What is this tool's training data? Knowledge cutoff date?
  • What is the data retention policy? Where is my client's information stored?
  • What verification would I still need to perform even with this specialized tool?
  • Does the cost and learning curve justify the benefits over tools I already have?