Search your case files. Keep them in your office.
A private AI agent on a computer your firm owns. It answers from your own files, shows the file and page it used, takes call notes and drafts the follow-up, and a lawyer checks every answer and approves every draft. I'm not a lawyer. Your firm decides what's allowed.
- In business since 2020
- Your firm owns the computer or cloud account
- Your files are never stored on my computers
- We respond within 24 hours
What a law firm runs into
Old work is hard to find
"Which closed matters did we argue this issue on?" usually means asking whoever remembers, then digging through folders. A search that answers from your own files, with the file and page, turns that into a question you type.
Public AI tools raise a confidentiality question
ABA Formal Opinion 512 says that before a lawyer puts client information into a generative AI tool, the lawyer must "evaluate the risks that the information will be disclosed to or accessed by others outside the firm." Keeping the files and the AI on your own computer changes what that evaluation looks at.
Some matters have to stay walled off
Opinion 512 also warns about information reaching people inside the firm who are barred from it by an ethical wall. Here, each matter or practice group can be its own collection of files with its own access list.
What the rules say, and where I fit
ABA Formal Opinion 512 (July 29, 2024) covers confidentiality, competence, supervision and fees when lawyers use generative AI. The State Bar of California's Practical Guidance for the Use of Generative AI in the Practice of Law (the 2026 version, which replaces the 2023 one) says a lawyer must not input confidential client information into a generative AI tool that may present material risks to confidentiality or security "absent informed client consent." It adds that reasonable efforts "require more than reliance on generalized marketing assurances" and may include consulting qualified IT or cybersecurity experts.
A computer your firm owns does not answer the ethics question for you. That call is yours, or your ethics counsel's. What I can do is give you plain written answers to the technical questions: where the files live, who can reach the computer and how, what is logged, what leaves the computer and what happens when we part ways. Then you have something concrete to review.
How it starts
Estimated timeline Audit report usually within a week of the session. Pilot usually 4–6 weeks.
These are estimates, not a promised date. The pilot length depends on the use you choose and how quickly lawyers can review the output.
Step 1: AI Workflow Audit
A 90-minute working session on how matters and files are organized, who must not see what, and the one first thing you'd want your AI agent to do. You get a written report. $500, credited in full against a build bought within 30 days.
90 minutes, then the report usually within a week
Step 2: Discovery
We list your document types, set the collections and who can open each, and pick the computer.
After the audit report
Step 3: Pilot
One use goes live for four to six weeks and is measured against how long it took before. Lawyers check the output the whole time.
Usually 4–6 weeks
Step 4: Monthly care
Monitoring, patches, backups, updates and re-indexing new files, under a written agreement that says what I can access.
Ongoing after the pilot
A few things firms might ask their agent to do. If there's something you want an AI agent to do, we can likely make it possible.
Find closed matters
"Find closed matters where we argued X." The agent returns the matters and the pages, so an associate can open the source instead of trusting a summary.
Answer from the firm's own forms
Ask your agent for the firm's standard clause, the engagement letter version used in 2024 or the template for a given practice area, from your own documents.
Client call summaries
An agent turns a recorded client call into a draft summary, action items and a follow-up email draft for attorney review. On a computer in your office, the audio stays there.
Intake to a record
An agent turns an intake form into a conflict-check record and a pre-filled engagement letter for an attorney to review, instead of being retyped.
Inbox triage
An agent that runs overnight and sorts the inbox into urgent, client, vendor and ignore. It sorts and drafts. It never replies on its own.
Something else
Tell me what your firm still does by hand. If an AI agent is a poor fit for it, I'll say so plainly.
Matters kept apart
Access is set per collection of documents. A firm might keep one collection per practice group, or one for a matter that has an ethical wall around it. Who can search which collection is decided with you in discovery and written down, not left to a default.
Drafts stay drafts
The State Bar of California's guidance says a lawyer must not deploy an agentic AI system in a way that permits autonomous external transmission of client information, including automated communications, filings or data transfers, without appropriate safeguards and human review. I build to that line. Everything the AI writes is a draft until someone at the firm approves it. Nothing is emailed, filed or sent on its own.
Opinion 512 is just as clear that the lawyer stays responsible: lawyers "may not abdicate their responsibilities by relying solely on a GAI tool to perform tasks that call for the exercise of professional judgment." The AI can be wrong. It shows its sources so a lawyer can check.
Questions I'll answer in writing
If your ethics counsel or managing partner wants to review this, I'll answer these in writing:
- Where do the files and the AI live?
- Who can reach the computer, how, and can access be turned off?
- What is logged, and who can see the logs?
- What crosses the internet, such as updates and an encrypted off-site backup?
- Who owns the computer and the accounts, and what do I hand over if we part ways?
What it is not
It is not a legal research service. It searches your files, not case law, so it does not replace Westlaw or Lexis. It does not give legal advice. It does not decide what is privileged.
It is also not for every firm. A solo lawyer with a small stack of documents may be better served by a business plan from a cloud AI company, as long as the lawyer has read the terms, which Opinion 512 expects anyway. If your files include patient health records, I'm not set up to take on that kind of work.
Pricing
Start with the AI Workflow Audit. It's $500, and it's credited in full against a build bought within 30 days. Everything else is priced after the audit, once I know your files, your matters and what you want the AI to do.
AI Workflow Audit
A firm that wants a written, concrete picture of what private AI would involve before spending on a build.
$500
One time. Credited in full against a build bought within 30 days.
- A 90-minute working session on your files, matters and access needs
- A written report of what I'd build and what computer fits
- Written technical answers your counsel can review
- A straight answer if a cloud plan would suit you better
- Not included: The build, priced after the audit
- Not included: The computer, which you buy from the seller
- Not included: Monthly care, priced after the audit
- Not included: Legal advice. I'm not a lawyer.
Everything else is priced after the audit. Results are measured and reported, not guaranteed.
Questions people ask
Does this make my firm compliant with Opinion 512?
No. No tool does that by itself. Opinion 512 puts duties on the lawyer: competence, confidentiality, communication, supervision and reasonable fees. I set the system up to support your own policies and I answer technical questions in writing. Your firm, or your ethics counsel, decides what is allowed.
Do we still need client consent to use AI?
That is your call or your counsel's, and I can't tell you. California's guidance says a lawyer must not input confidential client information into a tool that may present material risks "absent informed client consent." Opinion 512 says generic engagement-letter wording is not enough when consent is required. Whether a computer your firm owns changes the analysis is a question for your ethics counsel.
Can one matter's files be kept from people who are walled off?
Yes, access is set per collection of documents. Put the matter in its own collection and give the open list to the people who may see it. We set this up together in discovery.
Does it replace Westlaw or Lexis?
No. It searches your own files, not case law. It's for finding your own past work, forms and notes.
What happens when the AI gets something wrong?
It can be wrong, and it can sound sure when it is. Each answer shows the files it used so a lawyer can open them. Opinion 512 says lawyers "may not abdicate their responsibilities" by relying solely on an AI tool for tasks that call for professional judgment. The system is built so that a person reviews every draft.
Will it learn from our files and share them with other clients?
It looks things up in your files when someone asks. It doesn't train a shared model on them, and nothing from your files goes to other customers, because there is no shared system. Your firm has its own computer.
Do you count as an outside provider we have to supervise?
Treat me as one. Opinion 512 discusses a lawyer's duty to supervise outside providers under Model Rule 5.3, including understanding the provider's security and using confidentiality agreements. I work under a written agreement that says what I can access and how. I reach the computer only through an encrypted link you approve, with my own key and logged sessions, and you can turn it off at any time.
Can it summarize client calls?
Yes. A recording becomes a draft summary and action items for attorney review, and on a computer in your office the audio stays there. Whether and how you tell people they are being recorded is for you and your counsel to decide.
Do we need our own IT person?
Not to run the AI. I do that remotely. Someone on your side has to open the door once for the encrypted link I use, such as your IT company or office manager.
What does it cost?
The AI Workflow Audit is $500, credited in full against a build bought within 30 days. Everything else is priced after the audit.
Have you done this for a law firm before?
No. Private AI is a new service for GS46 Tech and I haven't installed it for a paying client yet. I build and test every system in my own lab on made-up documents, never real client data. We start with the audit and one small pilot, with lawyers checking the output the whole way.
Start here
Takes about a minute. We reply within 24 hours.
A few short questions about what you need, then I get back to you.
Request sent. Thank you.
I'll reply within 24 hours.
What happens next: I read your answers and write back using the contact details you gave. If I need anything else, I'll ask then.