PRIVATE AI INFRASTRUCTURE FOR LAW FIRMS

Use AI on confidential legal work.
Keep the data inside your firm.

The AI runs on a machine in your office. Your documents never leave the building, and every answer cites the page it came from.

No external AI API required Firm-owned infrastructure Cited, auditable answers
SCROLL TO EXPLORE↓
THE PROBLEM

Cloud AI can be excellent.
For some matters, sending the data out is the problem.

Client documents carry confidentiality obligations, client-imposed restrictions, and firm AI policies. The Florida Bar's own guidance recommends in-house AI to avoid third-party data exposure.

What Opinion 24-1 requires you to ask a vendor →

WHAT LAWYERS GET

Capability without giving up control.

01

Ask across firm knowledge

Find clauses, obligations, definitions, amendments, and precedent across authorized matter documents — without moving those documents to an external AI provider.

TYPICAL QUERYWhich of our MSAs cap liability below $2M, and which of those deviate from our standard clause?
02

Verify every answer

Answers are grounded in retrieved source material and linked back to a specific document, page and section you can open.

TYPICAL QUERYShow me the exact paragraph that supports that.
03

Respect ethical walls

Identity and matter authorization are applied before retrieval, so search cannot cross into matters the user is not permitted to access.

TYPICAL QUERYSummarise the Henderson matter.No results. The user is not authorized on that matter.
WHAT AN ANSWER LOOKS LIKEIllustrative interface. Documents and matter numbers are fictitious.Evaluating AI vendors? Use our Opinion 24-1 checklist →
LEXDEPLOY · FIRM-CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT
Authorized scope: Matter 2291-04

Where does the MSA limit our liability, and has that cap been amended?

Ask about this matter…

Where does the MSA limit our liability, and has that cap been amended?

GROUNDED ANSWER

Liability is capped in Article 11 of the Master Services Agreement. The original cap is the total fees paid in the twelve months preceding the claim, with carve-outs for breach of confidentiality, indemnified IP claims, and wilful misconduct.1

That cap was subsequently amended. Amendment No. 2 replaces the twelve-month formula with a fixed ceiling of $2,000,000 and adds data-protection breaches to the list of carve-outs.2 The internal negotiation summary records that the fixed ceiling was accepted in exchange for a narrower indemnity in Article 9.3

1
Master Services Agreement — Northgate / Client.pdfp. 34 · §11.2 Limitation of LiabilityOPEN SOURCE →
2
Amendment No. 2 to MSA (executed).pdfp. 3 · §4 Amendment to Article 11OPEN SOURCE →
3
MSA Negotiation Summary — internal memo.docxp. 2 · §Liability positionOPEN SOURCE →
Every citation resolves to a stored document, page, and section. The identifiers are produced by the application from document metadata, not generated by the model. Documents outside the user's authorized matters are never retrieved, so they cannot appear in an answer.
FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION 24-1

“Confidentiality concerns may be mitigated by use of an in-house generative AI rather than an outside generative AI where the data is hosted and stored by a third-party.”

The Florida Bar

The same opinion requires you to investigate any AI vendor before trusting it with client information. We published those questions as a checklist — use it on us, and on everyone else you are considering.

Open the vendor checklist ↗
THE REST OF IT

Three questions, three answers.

The detail lives on its own pages, so this one stays short. Each takes a couple of minutes.

Jacek Serafinski
WHO BUILDS IT

One engineer, accountable for the whole system.

Twenty years on systems where money moves and someone audits the trail — Block, Atlassian, Ovanti. Already running in production at two software companies, one of whom will take a reference call.

About Jacek →
SOLUTION & ARCHITECTURE BRIEF

Take the deeper technical brief with you.

The brief covers the private deployment model, RAG and citation path, matter isolation, managed operations, proof-of-concept methodology, implementation scope, and commercial model.

15-page decision briefSecurity + architecturePOC + pricing
Private Legal AISolution & Architecture Brief

This form posts to our own infrastructure and is stored in our own database. No third-party form processor, no marketing automation, no tracking pixels, and no phone number required.

REQUEST THE BRIEFFive fields. We reply from a person, not a sequence.
Used only to answer this request. Not shared, not added to a mailing list.

LET'S TEST IT

Could private AI work for your firm?

One day, in your office, on your own documents. If it doesn't convince you, nothing has been spent.

Book a demonstration day ↗No hardware purchase, and nothing to prepare.