Use casesLegal

Every matter starts where the last one left off.

Dunmore Pryce is a 380-lawyer firm in London and Leeds. Its agents mark up contracts and partners correct the markups, the same corrections across associates and matters. Thirty days in the commercial group put those corrections into memory a matter at a time, with one network per matter and nothing crossing between them.

Organisation
Commercial law firm, 380 lawyers, London and Leeds
Work in scope
Contract review and drafting, precedent selection, time narratives. Nothing reaches a client without a fee earner.
Agents in use
The firm's drafting assistant on Claude; Claude Code in the knowledge engineering team
Tools connected
The document management system, the precedent bank in Confluence, the practice management system, firm single sign-on
Pilot
Supply agreements in the commercial group, thirty days
Memory networks
Firm, practice group, one per client, one per matter, personal
Residency
Dedicated UK tenant. Information barriers mirror the firm's conflicts system.

01Starting point

Where Dunmore Pryce started

Fee earners at Dunmore Pryce run the firm's drafting assistant on every matter. It marks up the indemnity in a supply agreement, summarises disclosure, drafts the first turn of a shareholders' agreement and pulls the nearest precedent from the bank. The supervising partner corrects the markup before it goes to the client. The next morning a different associate runs the same review on a sister agreement and the same correction is needed again.

The knowledge lawyers measured a fortnight in the commercial group. Partners accepted 48 percent of first markups without a second pass. The rest mostly needed one of eight corrections the group had been making for years: the indemnity cap the firm will not accept for supplier clients, the carve-out for indirect loss, the house style for obligations, a precedent withdrawn after the merger that associates kept finding. House style sat on a Confluence page last edited before the merger. Precedents drifted as desks kept private versions.

Information barriers made the obvious fix unsafe. One shared memory for the firm puts a client's deal terms within reach of a team acting against that client on another matter. So the firm kept its agents stateless, kept the knowledge in partners' heads and in redlines, and paid for it on every engagement: a slower first turn, a second partner pass, the same markup repeated across associates.

02Day one

Day one

The assistant was connected in a day. The knowledge team spent a week seeding house style and mapping the current precedents, and the risk partner spent most of it on one question: how a matter network is created, sealed and closed.

  • The drafting assistantMCP connection, knowledge-work domain, signed in through firm single sign-on. A fee earner's reads are scoped by the matters the conflicts system says they may see.
  • Matter networksCreated automatically when a matter is opened in the practice management system, with the matter's team as its readers. Closed and archived when the matter closes.
  • Partners and associatesWhen a partner corrects a markup, the assistant proposes the lesson it has drawn, without the client's terms, and the partner saves it to the matter, offers it to the practice group, or skips it.
  • The precedent bankEvery insight that cites a precedent links to the version tagged current in Confluence, with the date. Withdrawn precedents are a policy, not a lesson.
  • SeedThe knowledge lawyers wrote house style as twenty policies and the group's standing corrections as thirty practice-group insights, each with a source and an owner.
  • SparkFirm and practice group networks administered by the knowledge team. Matter networks administered by the matter partner.
  1. FirmPolicies: house style, withdrawn precedents, what never enters memory, billing narrative standards.Every fee earner and every assistant.
  2. Practice groupThe commercial group's positions: what the firm accepts for supplier clients, how it opens on change of control, which precedents to start from.Fee earners in the group.
  3. Client networksA client's standing preferences: what it accepts, what it never signs, who signs off.Fee earners on that client's matters, as the conflicts system allows.
  4. Matter networks, one per matterThe deal's terms, the counterparty's positions, what has been conceded and why.The matter team only. Never promoted, never read sideways.
  5. PersonalA fee earner's own drafting habits.That fee earner's assistant only.

fig. 01Scope map

Dunmore Pryce memory networksNested scopes: the firm network holding house style and withdrawn precedents, the commercial practice group inside it, client networks inside that, and sealed matter networks at the centre; the only route up is a general rule approved by a knowledge lawyer.FIRMhouse style, withdrawn precedentsCOMMERCIAL PRACTICE GROUPthe group's positionsCLIENT NETWORKS, ONE PER CLIENTas conflicts allowMATTER NETWORKS, ONE PER MATTER · SEALEDSupply agreement 4471Supply agreement 4502Shareholders'agreement+ one per matterKNOWLEDGE LAWYERGENERAL RULE ONLYReads inherit downward · Writes stay local · Matters never read sideways
Dunmore Pryce memory networksNested scopes: the firm network holding house style and withdrawn precedents, the commercial practice group inside it, client networks inside that, and sealed matter networks at the centre; the only route up is a general rule approved by a knowledge lawyer.FIRMhouse style, withdrawn precedentsCOMMERCIAL PRACTICE GROUPCLIENT NETWORKS, ONE PER CLIENTMATTER NETWORKS, ONE PER MATTER · SEALEDSupply agreement 4471Supply agreement 4502Shareholders' agreement+ one per matterKNOWLEDGE LAWYERGENERAL RULE ONLYReads inherit downward · Writes stay local · Matters never readsideways
Matter networks are sealed: read by the matter team, never read sideways, archived at close. The dashed route is the only way up: a general rule with no client, deal or figure in it, approved by a knowledge lawyer.

03The first weeks

The first weeks

The practice-group seed meant the first week was not empty, but the first lesson a partner saved from a live correction came on day four and its first reuse on another matter on day eight.

fig. 02Deployment timeline

Dunmore Pryce: baseline fortnight to readoutTimeline from the baseline fortnight through connection and the seeding week, the first reuse on another matter on day eight, the change-of-control scope correction on day fourteen, the precedent update on day twenty-seven and the readout on day thirty.BASELINE FORTNIGHTSEEDING WEEKPILOT, COMMERCIAL GROUPDAY 8First reuse, anothermatterDAY -14Baseline in thecommercial groupDAY 0Assistant connected;house style seededDAY 4Indemnity cap lessonDAY 11Client position heldat the clientDAY 14Change-of-controllesson scopedDAY 27Precedent v14;fourteen reviewedDAY 30Readout: everypractice group
Dunmore Pryce: baseline fortnight to readoutTimeline from the baseline fortnight through connection and the seeding week, the first reuse on another matter on day eight, the change-of-control scope correction on day fourteen, the precedent update on day twenty-seven and the readout on day thirty.Baseline fortnightSeeding weekPilot, commercial groupDAY -14Baseline in the commercial groupDAY 0Assistant connected; house style seededDAY 4Indemnity cap lessonDAY 8First reuse, another matterDAY 11Client position held at the clientDAY 14Change-of-control lesson scopedDAY 27Precedent v14; fourteen reviewedDAY 30Readout: every practice group
Spacing is proportional to elapsed days. The filled mark is the first reuse: a partner's correction on one matter applied by an associate's assistant on another.
  • Day 4. A partner strikes an uncapped indemnity from a supplier-side markup, as he has on every supply agreement for a decade.On supplier-side reviews, cap indemnities at the contract value and carve out indirect loss. The firm does not accept uncapped indemnities for supplier clients.Offered to the practice group and approved by the knowledge lawyer. Day eight: an associate's assistant on a different matter applies it in the first markup. First reuse. The partner has not struck it since.
  • Day 6. An assistant cites the facility agreement precedent withdrawn after the merger.The pre-merger facility agreement precedent is withdrawn. Use the version tagged current and check the sanctions clause against it.Written as a firm policy, served on every precedent search. The withdrawn version stops appearing in markups at both offices.
  • Day 11. A client's agreed position on non-solicitation is proposed for the practice group, because it would be useful on other matters.A client's agreed positions are client facts. They live in the client network and never promote to the group, however useful they would be.Held by the rule. The lesson stays with the client. The associate who proposed it says it was the first time she understood what the barrier was for.
  • Day 14. A practice-group insight on change-of-control triggers, right for regulated counterparties, is applied to a start-up counterparty and the partner sends the markup back twice.Regulated-sector counterparties push back on wide change-of-control triggers; open narrow. For other counterparties, open on the precedent.Scoped by counterparty type. The partner stops reading the assistant's suggestions for a week, then agrees to approve the group's next ten insights himself. By week four he is saving his own.
  • Day 20. Billing strikes a time narrative that reads only review.Time narratives name the document and the task. A narrative that reads review alone is struck at billing.A firm policy. Narratives struck at billing fall by two-thirds in the group over the month.
  • Day 27. The knowledge team updates the firm's standard supply agreement precedent.The supply agreement precedent is version 14 from 27 October. Lessons citing clause numbers from version 13 are superseded.Fourteen practice-group insights are reviewed the same day; nine are rewritten against the new clause numbers and five are retired with the update as provenance.

04Governance

Governance

  • One network per matter, sealedA matter network is created from the practice management system, readable by the matter team and nobody else, and archived when the matter closes. Nothing in it is promoted and nothing is read across matters. The conflicts system decides who may read what.
  • Client facts stay with the clientA client's agreed positions and preferences live in that client's network and never reach the practice group. A lesson may be offered upward only as a general rule with no client, deal or figure in it, and a knowledge lawyer approves it.
  • Knowledge lawyers own the firm and the groupHouse style, withdrawn precedents and billing standards are policies written by the knowledge team, served on every task and never decayed. Practice-group insights wait for a knowledge lawyer. Matter insights are the matter partner's.
  • Nothing reaches a client without a fee earnerThe assistant drafts. A fee earner sends. The firm records this as a policy so no insight, however trusted, changes it.
  • Provenance, audit and residencyEvery insight links to the correction, precedent version or policy it came from and the date. Every read, write, approval and archive is logged, and the risk partner can reconstruct what any matter team's assistant knew on a given day. Memory sits in a dedicated UK tenant.

fig. 03The write path

From a partner's strike-through to another matter's markupSwimlane showing a partner striking an uncapped indemnity, the associate's assistant proposing the lesson without the client's terms, the partner offering it to the practice group, a knowledge lawyer approving the general rule, memco serving it to the commercial group while the matter version stays sealed, and another associate's assistant applying it on day eight.PARTNERASSOCIATE'SASSISTANTKNOWLEDGE LAWYERmemcoANOTHER ASSOCIATE'SASSISTANTStrikes theuncappedindemnityday 4Proposes thelesson, clientterms removedOffers it to thepractice groupABSTRACTION GATEApproves thegeneral ruleServed to thegroup; matterversion sealedApplies it in thefirst markupday 8
From a partner's strike-through to another matter's markupSwimlane showing a partner striking an uncapped indemnity, the associate's assistant proposing the lesson without the client's terms, the partner offering it to the practice group, a knowledge lawyer approving the general rule, memco serving it to the commercial group while the matter version stays sealed, and another associate's assistant applying it on day eight.PARTNERStrikes the uncapped indemnityday 4ASSOCIATE'S ASSISTANTProposes the lesson, client terms removedPARTNEROffers it to the practice groupKNOWLEDGE LAWYER · ABSTRACTION GATEApproves the general rulememcoServed to the group; matter versionsealedANOTHER ASSOCIATE'S ASSISTANTApplies it in the first markupday 8
The matter version stays in the matter. What rises is the general rule, approved by a knowledge lawyer. Nothing reaches a client without a fee earner.

05What compounded

What compounded

The thirty-day readout compared supply agreements in the commercial group with the fortnight's baseline and with the corporate group, which was not connected. The decision was to connect every practice group over the next quarter.

MetricMovementWhy
First-pass acceptance48% to 73%Markups accepted without a second pass, in the commercial group by day thirty. The corporate group moved from 46 to 47 percent.
Repeat-error rateEight corrections to twoThe two that remained are matters of tone a partner chose not to write down.
Time to an accepted resultA day and a half to under a dayFirst turn of a supply agreement, measured from instruction to the partner's approval. The gain is one fewer pass, not faster drafting.
Cross-person or agent learning gainDay eight, across officesLeeds reused London's corrections from day eight. Every practice-group insight was reused by an associate other than the one whose correction produced it.
Safe autonomous completionZero, by policyNothing leaves the firm without a fee earner. The metric the firm watches is the second partner pass, which is what fell.
Improvement with experienceClimbing, two groupsThe assistant's model changed in month two and the group's positions were unaffected, because they were never in the prompt.

fig. 04Connected and unconnected

Markups accepted without a second pass, baseline to day thirtySlopegraph: the commercial group rises from 48 to 73 percent of first markups accepted by the partner without a second pass, while the unconnected corporate group moves from 46 to 47.BASELINEDAY 3048%46%73%47%Commercial group, connectedCorporate group, unconnected
First markups accepted by the supervising partner without a second pass. Baseline fortnight and day thirty.

fig. 05Costs before it pays

Second partner passes per hundred markups, week by weekLine chart: second partner passes fall from 52 per hundred markups at baseline to 27 by week four, with the seeding week almost unchanged.2030406052BASELINE5023WK 1WK 2WK 3WK 4MO 2MO 3Second partner passes per 100 markups
Markups needing a second partner pass, per hundred, in the commercial group. The seeding week barely moved.

06What it cost

What it cost

  • Setup timeA fortnight of baseline in the commercial group. A day to connect the assistant and single sign-on. A week for the knowledge team to seed house style and map the current precedents, and for the risk partner to sign off how matter networks open and close.
  • Who ran itTwo knowledge lawyers and one engineer. Partners spent about ten minutes a day on proposed lessons in month one. No new headcount.
  • Licence and tokensAn enterprise agreement with a dedicated UK tenant and audit export. Retrieved insights add a few hundred tokens to each markup and remove the re-reading of the style guide and precedent that every stateless session did. Tokens per accepted markup fell by a third.
  • What it replacedThe prompt library in Confluence, the per-associate scratch notes, and the second partner pass that caught the same errors every time.

Keep every matter sealed and every correction learned.

Join the waitlist

More deployments.

All use cases