Every event in order, with its support attached.
The timeline is the spine of the matter. It records not only what happened and when, but how certain the date is, who said so, and what backs it up.
Confidence on a single event
Rear-end collision on I-10
Mar 2024 · exact date · police report, dashcam footage
Client stated
Someone said it happened.
Document supported
A record backs it up.
Witness supported
Another person confirms it.
Attorney confirmed
Reviewed and signed off.
Uncertainty is data, not a defect.
Forcing a precise date onto a vague memory manufactures a fact. The timeline records how well the date is actually known.
exact
A specific, known calendar date.
approximate
A month or period the client is reasonably confident about.
range
Bounded between two dates; the event occurred somewhere in that range.
unknown
Ordered relative to other events, but not yet dated.
Not every fact in a file is equally solid.
Client stated
Someone said it happened.
Document supported
A record backs it up.
Witness supported
Another person confirms it.
Attorney confirmed
Reviewed and signed off.
A client’s recollection, a supporting document, an independent witness, and an attorney’s confirmation are different source states. Keeping them distinct helps the reviewer see where support is thin.
Each event carries its current level, and can also be marked disputed when sources conflict, or missing support when nothing backs it yet.
Nothing enters the file unreviewed.
Extracted events arrive as suggestions. A human reviewer decides what happens next.
suggested
Extracted from a client answer, not yet looked at by the firm.
needs_review
Flagged for a paralegal or attorney to examine.
approved
Accepted into the working timeline after firm review.
edited
Corrected by the firm, with the original answer still on record.
rejected
Removed from the working timeline without deleting its source.
What the timeline records.
What happened
A short factual statement of the event, in neutral language.
When
Start and end where applicable, plus the date type describing how well it is known.
Where
Location, kept as a record that can link across events.
Who was involved
People tagged by role: participant, witness, victim, actor, or mentioned.
What supports it
Linked documents and evidence, each marked as supporting, contradicting, or merely mentioning.
What the attorney thinks
Notes attached to the event, with visibility controls that keep internal analysis internal.
Where this leads next.
Test the workflow on a representative matter.
Start with a synthetic or fully redacted matter. An initial evaluation does not require live client data.