Skip to main content
Log in

Technology report: Building legal practice systems with today's commercial authoring tools

  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Document assembly and other substantive legal practice applications are the most knowledge-intense forms of software now widely available in the legal technology marketplace. This article provides an illustrative look at two contemporary practice system engines-CAPS and Scrivener-and examines their relevance for AI-and-law researchers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boyd, W. & Saxon, C. 1981. The A-9: A Program for Drafting Security Agreements under Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Am. B. Found. Res. J Vol. 3, 637–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bräuer, I., Gerl, G., von Han, U., Kowalewski, D., Wiefel, S., Schneeberger, J. & Strasser, A. 1991. KOKON: Konfigurierung von Dokumenten am Beispiel ‘Immobiliarkaufverträge’. In Wissensbasierte Systeme im Büro. Ergebnisse aus dent WISDOM-Verbundprojekt, eds. R. Lutze and A. Kohl, 367–399. R. Oldenbourg Verlag.

  • Clairbome, R. 1989. The Roots of English. New York:Times Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eidelman, J. 1989. The Automated Law Office: Software Tools for Document Assembly. The Lawyer's PC. Vol. 6, No. 20421.

  • Evans, D. 1990. Artificial Intelligence and Document Assembly. Law Practice Management Vol. 16, No. 4, 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, H. 1985. Expert Systems as a Tool for Drafting Legal Decisions. In Automated Analysis of Legal Texts, ed. Martino, 607–612. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, T. 1989. A Theory Construction Approach to Legal Document Assembly. In Pre-Proceedings of The Third International Conference on Logic, Informatics, and Law, 2:485–498. Florence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauritsen, M. 1991. Project Pericles in Retrospect. 5 Yearbook of Law, Computers and Technology 50–57.

  • Lauritsen, M. 1989. Representing Lawyering Knowledge in Practice Systems. In Pre-Proceedings of The Third International Conference on Logic, Informatics, and Law, 1:447–460. Florence.

  • McDermott, J. 1982. R1: A Rule Based Configurer of Computer Systems. Artificial Intelligence 19:39–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pethe, V., Rippey, C. & Kale, L. 1989. A Specialized Expert System for Judicial Decision Support. In Proceedings of The Second International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 190–194. Vancouver:Association for Computing Machinery.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxon, C. 1981. Computer Aided Drafting of Legal Documents. Ph.D. dissertation at the University of Michigan. Ann Arbor:University Microfilms International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprowl, J. 1979. Automating the Legal Reasoning Process: A Computer that uses Regulations and Statutes to Draft Legal Documents. Am. B. Found. Res. J. Vol. 1979, No. 1, 1–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprowl, J. 1980. The Automated Assembly of Legal Documents. In Computer Science and Law, ed. B. Niblett, 195–205.

  • Wilson, E. 1989. Drafting Legal Documents with JUSTUS' Clerk. In Pre-Proceedings of The Third International Conference on Logic, Informatics, and Law, 2:909–922. Florence.

  • Zuboff, S. 1989. In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power. New York:Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lauritsen, M. Technology report: Building legal practice systems with today's commercial authoring tools. Artif Intell Law 1, 87–102 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00118480

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00118480

Key words

Navigation