Matter management software where agents read the filings and keep every date, status, budget and reserve cited — and your lawyers sign
Every matter's status, dates, budget and reserve read from the filings, not retyped.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Software that keeps an in-house legal department's matters in one record: parties, court dates, outside firms, budgets, spend, status and reserves. Legal Matter Management adds seven agents that read the court orders, filings, letters and invoices themselves, so each matter's dates, status, budget forecast and reserve stay current and cited — and lawyers sign every decision.
How to choose AI solutions for back-office and enterprise work →
Updated
An in-house legal department carries hundreds of open matters, and their record is typed by hand. A paralegal re-keys court dates from e-filing emails, and when a docket control order is amended every dependent date has to be found and moved. A lawyer rewrites the status field from the firm's quarterly letter. The field has no source, and it ages from the day it is written.
Spend is compared with the phase budget in a spreadsheet, usually after the invoice arrives — after the money is spent. At month end legal ops emails every firm for unbilled work in progress. Each quarter the matter owner, the General Counsel and the Controller meet over a spreadsheet to set the ASC 450 reserve, and the reasoning lives in email. Then the GC's report to the audit committee is assembled by hand from the same status fields, and it can contradict the matter record.
Estimated split for one active litigation matter over a quarter, by hand and with the solution, in hours.
Seven specialist agents read orders, write the status, forecast spend and propose reserves; the GC and the Controller sign.
Delgado v. Kestrel & Vane Industrial Products, Inc. is a product liability case in the District Court of Harris County, Texas: a warehouse worker crushed his right hand and forearm on an HL-40 hydraulic lift table and seeks over $1,000,000. On Tuesday evening the court's amended docket control order arrives. Here is what happens next, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Claire's day starts with one screen. Overnight the agents read 23 new documents across 11 matters; the court moved the Delgado trial to February, and a budget change and a reserve change follow from it. Four things need her, each with its due date: the new Delgado dates, Baxter Lane's revised budget, four reserve proposals for the GC and the Controller, and a new petition served in Bexar County.
“The court moved trial to 9 Feb 2027: accept 7 new dates. The docket agent read the order and cited each paragraph. One computed date falls on a Sunday and needs your call.”
The Amended Docket Control Order came in at 18:05 and Elliot Brandt of Baxter Lane forwarded it at 18:22. At 18:31 the docket agent had read it, moved six dates and computed the pretrial disclosures from Rule 194.4. Two minutes later the status agent rewrote two sentences of the matter's status — every sentence cited, from 18 sources — and flagged that Baxter Lane's own Q3 status report still says trial is set for 2 November.
“One needs you: 30 days before trial is Sun 10 Jan, so I propose Fri 8 Jan 2027.” — Docket agent
Claire clicks the citation on the new trial date. The order opens at paragraph 1, signed Fri 9 Oct 2026, with the passage the agents used highlighted. She can open it in the matter's documents or copy the sentence with its citation into an email.
“Trial is reset to February 9, 2027 at 9:00 a.m. The setting of November 2, 2026 is vacated.” — Amended Docket Control Order ¶ 1
Claire types the question in the matter's thread. The docket agent answers: Rule 194.4 asks for pretrial disclosures at least 30 days before trial, which lands on Sun 10 Jan. Counting backwards, moving the date later could make it 29 days, so it proposed the business day before. Its confidence is 0.72 because the order does not set the date — below the 0.90 line, so a person decides. Claire confirms Fri 8 Jan.
The docket agent never deletes a date, and any date below 0.90 confidence goes to a person.
Claire accepts the seven new dates with reason code “D1 · Dates match the order” and ticks “I have checked the new dates against the order”. The dates go to the calendars of Claire Donovan, Hana Takeda, Nora Pike and Elliot Brandt. The old dates stay in the record, with the order as their reason.
Her typed name, the reason code and the time go on the audit trail.
The schedule moved, so the budget agent re-forecast. Baxter Lane has spent $452,400 of its $520,000 discovery (L300) budget — 87.0%, counting billed, in-review and unbilled work in progress — with six depositions still to take. At this matter's own $14,200 average per deposition, the phase finishes at $611,000: $91,000 over, crossing the budget around Fri 6 Nov. The burn-up shows Baxter Lane's spend against its budget, today marked and the forecast to completion, with each phase below it.
Matter total: $813,200 of $1,476,000 across Baxter Lane, Marlow Reyes and Tessaract Engineering.
Baxter Lane's revised budget BR-2026-0412 asks +$182,000. The budget agent reviews every line. Line 4 asks $27,000 to re-review 41,000 documents — but the same 41,280 documents were reviewed and billed in July (invoice BL-2607-118, task L320). It recommends +$155,000, taking the budget to $1,395,000: +12.5%, over the 10% line, so the GC approves. Claire recommends it with reason code “B1 · Schedule changed by court order”; Rafael Ortiz approves, and Elliot Brandt is told why $27,000 was left out, with the July invoice line cited.
“The schedule change does not reopen review.” The budget agent never approves or short-pays on its own.
The reserve agent proposes raising Delgado's reserve from $1,500,000 to $2,250,000 (+$750,000): the low end of Baxter Lane's probable range of $2.25M to $4.0M, because no amount in the range is a better estimate. Each input is cited — the firm's Q3 assessment, the expert's finding that units built before March 2023 had no pinch-point label while the plaintiff's was built in November 2022, a $2,612,400 life-care plan and a $6,500,000 demand. Up to $1,750,000 above the accrual goes to the disclosure note.
“Checked by the report agent: every figure matches its source; the change is below $1,000,000, so the CFO's signature is not needed.”
Rafael signs the classification and the amount. Only then can Anika co-sign: the screen shows the GC's signature, the $2,250,000 accrual and the journal line — Dr 6430 Litigation loss, Cr 2160 Accrued litigation — with reason code “R1 · New evidence on liability”. Across the four Q3 proposals, total litigation reserves move from $18.40M to $19.18M, due for sign-off by Fri 23 Oct, ahead of the 10-Q due Mon 9 Nov.
“I agree the amount and the classification for the Q3 financial statements.”
The report agent drafted the GC's Q3 litigation report for the audit committee meeting on Wed 28 Oct: portfolio, reserves, the Delgado matter, outside counsel spend and settlements. Fourteen sentences, all cited; 23 of 23 numbers cross-checked against the other agents' records. It waits on the Controller's co-signatures and can be regenerated after today's decisions. It goes to Rafael to send — the agent never sends a report.
“Privileged and confidential: prepared at the direction of counsel for the Audit Committee.”
The same matter, seen by four of the people who carry it — what the quarter looked like, and what it looks like now.
Seven specialist agents read orders, write the status, forecast spend and propose reserves; the GC and the Controller sign.
Reads served petitions, demand letters and subpoenas, and proposes the matter record with every field cited. Computes the answer date under the court's rule and shows the working, finds related matters, checks conflicts, and proposes the firm, a budget template and a legal hold request.
Reads e-filing notices, orders and firm emails; moves dates with the order paragraph cited; computes dependent dates across weekends and holidays; and pushes accepted dates to calendars.
Writes each matter's status from its filings, orders, correspondence and the firm's reports, every sentence cited, and flags where a firm's report contradicts the court record.
Forecasts each phase at completion from the matter's own unit costs and its court schedule, warns before an overrun, and reviews revised budgets line by line against what was already billed.
Asks each firm for month-end unbilled work in progress, estimates for firms that don't answer from their history, and prepares the journal file for finance.
Proposes each quarter's ASC 450 classification, accrual and reasonably possible range per matter, citing the firm's assessment, demands, expert reports and rulings, and drafts the contingency note and the journal line.
Drafts the GC's portfolio and audit committee reports and cross-checks every number against the other agents' records before a person sees it.
Sign every budget increase and reserve. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Every matter, the Today brief, the deadlines, the reserves and the reports have a place to ask or instruct the agents. Answers cite their sources, and any action they offer waits for a person to confirm it.
Why is the 194.4 date a Friday?
Rule 194.4 asks for pretrial disclosures at least 30 days before trial. 30 days before Tue 9 Feb 2027 is Sun 10 Jan. When a deadline is counted backwards and lands on a weekend, moving it later could make it 29 days, so I proposed the business day before. My confidence is 0.72 because the order does not set the date.
What drives the overrun?
Three things: six depositions still to take at this matter's average of $14,200 ($85,200); expert discovery now that our designations move to 11 Dec ($41,600); and supplemental written discovery and a motion to compel ($31,800). That is $158,600 of work against $67,600 left in the phase: $91,000 over.
Why the low end, not the midpoint?
ASC 450-20-30-1: when a range is estimable and no amount in it is a better estimate, the minimum is accrued. Baxter Lane's Q3 assessment gives $2.25M to $4.0M and says no point is more likely. If counsel names a better estimate, I re-propose at that figure. The $1.75M above the accrual goes into the disclosure note, not the books.
What is our total HL-40 exposure?
Two open claims. Delgado: proposed reserve $2.25M, up to $1.75M more reasonably possible. Harlow: pleads $250,000 or less, and no reserve is set until counsel assesses it. Both units were built before the label change. 3,180 such units shipped, so a product-safety review is worth asking for.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
The thresholds the agents work to are settings. Each change makes a new version that the General Counsel approves before it applies.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Warn when a phase reaches | 80% of budget, or a forecast over 100% | Change the level · turn off |
| GC approves budget increases above | 10% or $100,000 | Change the percentage or amount |
| Reserve changes are signed by | GC + Controller; also the CFO above $1,000,000 | Change the signers or the CFO line |
| A person confirms a date when confidence is below | 0.90 | Change the confidence line |
| A status is stale after | 14 days; the firm is asked | Change the days · turn off |
| Month-end accrual requests go out | 3 business days before month end; estimate after 2 more | Change the timing |
| Firm status reports required | Monthly, for litigation over $500,000 | Change the frequency or the threshold |
| Docket agent may accept dates on its own | Off | On at confidence 0.99 or more, for dates unchanged by an order · Off |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (Gartner survey, 17 Dec 2025 — only about 1 in 5 matters sent to outside counsel stays within its budget range, and the average department spends $162,000 a year on work that duplicates outside counsel's; ASC 450-20 on accrual and disclosure of loss contingencies). People, companies, firms, products, cause numbers and invoices named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution; the courts and rules are real and used only as the setting.
Software that keeps an in-house legal department's matters in one record: parties, court dates, outside firms, budgets, spend, status and reserves. Legal Matter Management adds seven agents that read the court orders, filings, letters and invoices themselves, so each matter's dates, status, budget forecast and reserve stay current and cited — and lawyers sign every decision.
The docket agent reads e-filing notices and orders as they arrive, moves each date with the order paragraph cited and computes dependent dates under the court's rules. A date it is less than 0.90 sure of goes to the matter owner with its reasoning. Once accepted, the dates go to the team's calendars, and old dates stay in the record.
Yes. The status agent writes the status from the filings, orders, correspondence and the firm's reports, and every sentence carries a citation that opens the source passage. Where a firm's report contradicts the court record, it flags it and one click asks the firm to correct it.
Yes. The budget agent forecasts each UTBMS phase at completion from the matter's own unit costs and its court schedule, counting billed, in-review and unbilled work. It warns before the overrun, and checks a firm's revised budget line by line against what was already billed.
The reserve agent proposes each quarter's classification, accrual and reasonably possible range per matter, citing the firm's assessment, demands, expert reports and rulings, and drafts the contingency note and the journal line. It never books a reserve: the General Counsel signs, the Controller co-signs, and the CFO signs above $1,000,000.
Outside counsel see only their own matters in the firm portal, where they send status, revised budgets and accruals and answer the agents' questions — never a reserve. Business viewers see a non-privileged summary; the privileged status, the reserve and the firm's assessment are not shown to them.
Yes. The agents state facts and propose; strategy and outcomes are counsel's. The matter owner accepts dates and opens matters, the GC approves budget increases above the threshold and signs reserves, the Controller co-signs, and every action is on the audit trail.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your outside counsel guidelines, budget templates, reserve policy and a sample of your matters — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own matters first.
Every deadline met, and every page traced to the request it answers.
1-min demoPublic Records Request ManagementEvery withheld line cites its law, and every release goes out before the clock runs.
1-min demoLegal Intake & TriageRoutine questions answered in minutes; anything risky reaches a lawyer first.
1-min demoWe'll run Legal Matter Management on a sample of your own matters, court orders and outside counsel invoices.