Litmas AI

More defense cases. Same team. Sharper output. Litmas helps you expand capacity without sacrificing quality with AI-based motion & pleading response templates.

While Litmas AI was built with security and privacy in mind from the begining, after undergoing an extensive audit, Litmas AI has been officially certified as HIPAA and SOC 2 compliant. This isn't a badge we're adding after the fact. It's independent confirmation of how we built the platform from day one, because we knew that an AI litigation tool would only be as good as the trust attorneys could place in it. Our SOC 2 report and HIPAA security assessment were both completed by 360 Advanced, a licensed CPA and cybersecurity audit firm (who also audited Anthropic, Dole, Weight Watchers, etc.). If you've been on the fence about trying Litmas AI because of what it means to put sensitive case material into an AI platform, I want to make this simple: you can upload your most sensitive documents with confidence. Here's why: - Full encryption in transit (TLS 1.2+) and at rest, with automatic key rotation - Bank grade security with continuous monitoring, ongoing vulnerability scanning, and regular penetration testing -We do not train AI models on your data. Case material is used for inference only, full stop -Backups run on a regular cadence, with a disaster recovery plan rehearsed annually This was all independently verified, so don't just take our word for it. If you've been waiting for the right moment to try Litmas AI the time has come.

I’ve seen a big shift in what lawyers using AI worry about most...A year ago, every conversation was about fake cases. Made-up citations, hallucinated holdings, the kind of error that gets an attorney sanctioned and makes headlines. That risk hasn't gone away, but it's no longer what keeps people up at night. Several specialized tools (not generic AI) have gotten reasonably good at not inventing case law out of thin air. What worries attorneys now is quieter than that. It's the real case, cited correctly, but applied wrong. A holding stretched past what it actually stands for. A fact pattern that doesn't quite match. This kind of error doesn't look like a hallucination on its face. It reads like confident, well-supported legal writing. And that's exactly what makes it dangerous, it's much harder to spot than a fake case, but it carries the same consequences if it slips into a filing. Here's the part I keep coming back to: no matter how good a platform's anti-hallucination measures are, there always has to be an attorney at the end verifying the facts and the case law. The verification step is not going away, nor should it. Especially as more and more courts are requiring disclosure of the use of AI tools and that the attorneys have personally verified every citation. The real question is whether that verification is efficient enough to actually happen under deadline pressure, or whether it gets skipped. Whether the verification process remains manual to the point that the efficiency gain of using AI in the first place doesn't add value. That's the problem we built Litmas AI to solve. To fix not only the obvious issue: blatant hallucinations, but also the second, which is much harder. We built the first litigation AI with a full verification workflow built in: on one side, the motion your AI is drafting; on the other, the specific citations to case law and facts behind every claim in it. You verify the underlying case law and the underlying facts inline, right next to the language they support, instead of digging back through a separate research trail after the fact (see image screenshot below). Verification workflows that assist attorneys in fulfilling their ethical obligations to verify sources quickly isn't a nice-to-have...it's the whole point.

I've picked up a lot of new followers lately, so it seems like the right time to reintroduce myself. I'm Jason Weber, and I'm a litigator. Not a research attorney, not a contract drafting lawyer....a hardcore litigator. I founded Xander Law Group in downtown Miami in 2011 and grew it for 10 years before joining PayCargo, a fintech company, as Chief Legal Officer in 2019. In my journey with PayCargo, I helped raise $350 million from private equity firms like Blackstone, Tiger Global, and Insight Partners. Also led an IP infringement litigation against a direct competitor, won a $17 million judgment, and collected every penny when we won the appeal. So it's safe to say I know my way around litigation, from both sides of the table. That background is exactly why I co-founded Litmas AI. When I looked at the legal AI market, I saw plenty of tools for contract drafting, due diligence, and M&A, for big law. What I didn't see was anything built for litigators. Not just research tools, but tools that actually produce attorney work product: fully drafted motions nearly file ready, and backed by full citation verification workflows. We also went after the unglamorous stuff VCs don't get excited about, like formatting. But every litigator knows formatting is the bane of their existence. Solving it wasn't an AI problem so much as a knowledge problem: understanding how to extract the actual formatting rules and templates courts require, so drafted output matches jurisdiction-specific requirements anywhere in the country. My co-founder, Sriram Sekhar, and I piloted Litmas AI with about 80 law firms before launch and took in an enormous amount of feedback. We built the platform around it, and shipped features like: - Drafting Agent, which produces fully drafted documents that are 90% ready to file. Not outlines to organize thoughts, but fully formatted cited motions. - Pincites to the factual record on every factual assertion in every motion output, down to the page and line number. - Verification workflows that let litigators quickly check case citations, factual citations, and drafting output, without sacrificing quality or spending so much time verifying that AI stops being worth using in the first place. - A pre-suit module with a privileged chat, so attorneys, clients, and the AI can communicate safely before a case is even filed. At Litmas AI, we're relentlessly pursuing the perfect AI tool for litigators, and we won't stop until we get there. Because at Litmas AI, we NEVER SETTLE!

From skeptical to stunned in 10 minutes, this is what happens literally every time I show a litigator a demo of Litmas AI. Not because of a slick feature, but because of the quality of the actual work product output. Here's the thing people get wrong: they lump us in with Harvey and Legora because "legal AI" is one category in their heads. It isn't. Harvey and Legora are general-purpose tools built for contract drafting, due diligence, M&A, and coordinating huge teams inside big law. That's a real and valuable job. It's just not our job. Litmas AI does one thing: litigation. From pre-suit through appeals. That focus is the whole strategy. It starts with our Evidence Mapper. Upload the operative complaint and it extracts the counts, it then breaks the counts down into elements, and then surfaces the specific facts in your record that support each element. Nothing generic. Everything tied back to your case. From there, our Drafting Agent takes over. It doesn't produce a summary or a first draft to be rewritten from scratch, it produces fully formatted, 90% file-ready documents. This includes motions as complex as a motion for summary judgment, with every claim pincited to your factual record down to the page and line number and formatted to the rules of the specific court you're in. I could keep listing the differences, but the graphic below does it faster: a direct, feature-by-feature comparison of Litmas against Harvey and Legora on the things that actually matter in litigation. We're not trying to be the best at everything. We're trying to be the best at litigation.

Trial attorneys who used to refer appeals out are now filing them in-house with Litmas AI. The dense briefs, the verified case law, the procedural requirements: all of it handled in minutes. The work that once required premium outside counsel now stays in the firm.