Documents attached to the facts they support.
A file full of PDFs tells you nothing about which claims are actually supported. Linking each document to the event it backs turns a folder into a coverage map.
What the record surfaces
Illustrative
- Timeline
- Evidence
- Conflicts
- Tasks
A document does not always help.
The relationship between a document and an event is recorded explicitly, because “related to” is not specific enough to act on.
supports
The document corroborates the event as described.
contradicts
The document conflicts with the event and raises a flag for review.
mentions
The event appears in the document without being substantiated by it.
needs_review
The relationship has not been assessed yet.
Where every document stands.
uploaded
Received and awaiting triage.
needs_review
In the queue for a paralegal or attorney.
accepted
Reviewed and retained for the stated purpose.
rejected
Reviewed and not usable for the purpose requested.
needs_translation
Awaiting translation, with the dependency visible to the team.
needs_clarification
Something about it does not match the account and requires a follow-up.
Gaps become visible in both workflows.
When the system knows a claim depends on a document that does not exist yet, it does not need to be told the document is missing. The gap is a property of the graph.
That gap becomes a line on the client’s checklist and a task on the paralegal’s board at the same time, so both sides are working from the same list instead of two different ones.
- Requested: asked for, not yet received
- Uploaded: received, not yet reviewed
- Reviewed: assessed and linked
- Needs clarification: received but inconsistent
Document types tracked
Test the workflow on a representative matter.
Start with a synthetic or fully redacted matter. An initial evaluation does not require live client data.