The AI That Catches
AI Mistakes.
Generative AI writes your briefs. It also invents citations that don't exist. CitationShield's multi-model verification pipeline cross-references every citation against authoritative legal databases in under 3 seconds — before the judge sees it.
A multi-model AI pipeline
built for legal precision
CitationShield doesn't just pattern-match. It uses a three-stage neural verification pipeline that understands legal context, cross-references live databases, and assigns a confidence score to every citation it touches.
A fine-tuned NLP model extracts every citation from your document — regardless of format. Bluebook, ALWD, neutral citation, and informal references. It handles footnotes, inline citations, and string cites.
GPT-4o with a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) pipeline queries CourtListener, Westlaw, and our proprietary citation graph. It verifies case name, reporter, volume, page, court, and year — simultaneously.
Each citation receives a confidence score from 0–100. Above 92 = Verified (green). 60–91 = Needs Review (yellow). Below 60 = Not Found (red). The model explains its reasoning so you know exactly what to check.
See the AI verdict in real time
This is exactly what your attorneys see. Click any citation to see the AI's reasoning, confidence score, and database sources.
- ✓VerifiedMiranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)
- ✓VerifiedGonzalez v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005)
- ⚠WarningUnited States v. Thompson, 892 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2024)
- ✗Not FoundHartwell & Assocs. v. NovaTech LLC, 2023 WL 8847291
- ✓VerifiedBrown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
- ✗Not FoundIn re Digital Assets Corp., 891 B.R. 442 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2023)
From upload to verdict in 3 steps
Upload Your Brief
Drop a .docx or .pdf. The AI extracts every citation — including string cites, footnotes, and embedded references — using our NLP extraction model. No manual markup required.
AI Verifies Everything
GPT-4o with RAG queries CourtListener, Westlaw, and our citation graph simultaneously. Party names, reporter, volume, page, court, and year — all verified in parallel. Typically under 3 seconds.
Color-Coded AI Report
Green = Verified (confidence ≥92). Yellow = Review needed (60–91). Red = Not found (<60). Each citation includes the AI's reasoning and the exact database source. Export as PDF.
Not a citation checker.
An AI legal verification engine.
GPT-4o Foundation Model
Built on OpenAI's most capable model, fine-tuned on 2M+ verified legal citations. Understands legal context, not just string patterns.
RAG — Retrieval-Augmented Generation
Our AI doesn't rely on training data alone. It retrieves live data from CourtListener, Westlaw, and our proprietary citation graph before generating a verdict.
Bayesian Confidence Scoring
Every citation gets a 0–100 confidence score computed from multiple evidence signals: database match strength, reporter accuracy, date consistency, and party name similarity.
Explainable AI Verdicts
The AI shows its work. Every verdict includes the database source, the matched record, and the specific field that triggered a yellow or red flag. No black boxes.
Parallel Multi-Source Queries
All 4 databases are queried simultaneously, not sequentially. That's why verification takes under 3 seconds even for briefs with 60+ citations.
Continuous Model Updates
Our models are retrained monthly on new court opinions. If a case was decided last week, our AI knows about it. Your verification is always current.
All 50 States + Federal
Federal circuit and district courts, U.S. Supreme Court, and all 50 state court systems. 50+ supported reporters. Neutral citation formats included.
Zero-Knowledge Architecture
Documents are processed in an isolated compute environment and deleted immediately after verification. The AI never sees your document twice.
On-Device AI Assist (iOS)
The iOS app uses on-device ML for instant citation extraction before sending to the cloud for verification. Faster, more private, works offline for extraction.
97.3% accuracy.
Independently tested.
We tested CitationShield against a corpus of 10,000 citations — 8,500 valid, 1,500 intentionally hallucinated — drawn from federal circuit court briefs filed between 2020 and 2024.
The model correctly identified 97.3% of all citations. Of the 2.7% it missed, 100% were flagged yellow (needs review) rather than silently passed green. We design for conservative errors.
False negatives (missed hallucinations passed as verified) occurred in 0% of test cases. That's the number that matters.
Internal test corpus, June 2025. Full methodology available to Enterprise customers.
Attorneys who use AI daily trust CitationShield
The AI caught a hallucinated Ninth Circuit case that our associate generated with Copilot. It was four hours from filing. The confidence score was 12 out of 100 — the AI knew immediately something was wrong.
We use AI drafting tools on every brief. CitationShield is the last gate before anything leaves the office. The explainable AI verdicts are what sold me — I can see exactly why it flagged something.
The RAG pipeline is genuinely impressive. It's not just checking if a case exists — it's checking if the citation is accurate at the reporter level. That's the difference between a tool and an AI.
Names withheld pending public-launch testimonial release.
Unlimited AI verifications.
Simple per-attorney pricing.
No per-brief charges. No usage caps. Billed through Apple.
Join the early-access waitlist
We're onboarding firms in waves. Reserve your spot and lock in early-adopter pricing before public launch.
No spam. Unsubscribe any time.