Contract Review & Drafting
Associates draft and review contracts grounded in your firm's own playbooks, precedent libraries, and clause databases, without sending client agreement terms to an external server for analysis.
Your attorneys are already using AI. The question is whether they are using one that keeps client information where it belongs. Lumen, the private AI platform from Cognetryx, runs entirely inside your firm's network. No subscriptions that own your data, no terms of service that matter more than your client's trust, no cloud server your client never agreed to.
72%
Of legal professionals are using AI tools at work, most without firm-sanctioned platforms
Thomson Reuters, 2024
0
Client matter data ever transmitted outside your network when Lumen is deployed
Architectural outcome
90 days
Typical time from kickoff to a fully deployed, firm-wide system
Implementation roadmap
See it in action
Ask in plain language. Get an answer drawn only from your documents, with the source passage shown and highlighted, so anyone can check the work.
Lumen · grounded in your documents
Can we open a new matter before the conflict check clears?
Answer
No. The matter cannot be opened until the conflict check is cleared and documented by the responsible partner, and any waiver must be obtained in writing and kept in the file.
↳ Section 4, ¶2 · p.9↳ Section 4, ¶4 · p.9
Answered from 2 passages in your Risk & Intake Manual
Hale & Brandt LLPAttorney-Client Privileged
Risk & Intake Manual
Firm Policy Section
Section 4: New Matter Intake
| Scope | Every new client, and every new matter for an existing client. |
|---|---|
| Owner | The responsible partner for the matter. |
| Standard | ABA Model Rules 1.7 and 1.9. |
Procedure
1. Intake records all parties, adverse parties, related entities, and the scope of the matter.
2. No matter may be opened until the conflict check is cleared and documented by the responsible partner.
3. Where a conflict appears, the partner determines whether it is waivable under the Model Rules.
4. Any conflict waiver must be obtained in writing and retained in the matter file.
5. Lateral hires trigger a supplemental conflict check against their prior client list.
6. The intake record is retained for the life of the matter and the firm's retention period.
RM-INTAKE-04 · Rev 5 · Effective 2026-01-10 · Owner: Office of General CounselPrivileged & confidential · p.9
Where Firms Start
The fastest ROI comes from AI that handles documented, repetitive, privilege-sensitive work that is already happening, just without the right controls. Lumen operationalizes existing institutional knowledge without replacing attorney judgment.
Associates draft and review contracts grounded in your firm's own playbooks, precedent libraries, and clause databases, without sending client agreement terms to an external server for analysis.
AI-assisted document analysis and issue tagging runs entirely inside the case environment. Privilege review workflows that flag potentially privileged materials never route that material outside the firm's boundary.
Research memos grounded in your practice group's existing work product, internal guidance notes, and approved case law databases. Output stays inside the matter, logged and traceable.
New business intake workflows that surface potential conflicts from internal matter databases without exposing prospective client identities and adverse party information to a third-party AI processor.
In-house legal teams query internal policy libraries, past regulatory submissions, and compliance frameworks in plain language. Answers cite your organization's own governance documents, not generic summaries.
New attorneys access institutional knowledge about firm practice standards, client preferences, and matter histories without requiring a senior partner to interrupt billing time answering orientation questions.
Ethics & Compliance Mapping
Bar ethics opinions on AI are converging on a consistent message: the competence and confidentiality obligations travel with the tool selection. Here is how Lumen directly addresses each obligation without requiring attorneys to change how they work.
| Obligation / Framework | The Requirement | How Lumen Addresses It |
|---|---|---|
| ABA Model Rule 1.6 | Lawyers must make reasonable efforts to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of client information. | No client information is transmitted to a third party. The reasonable effort standard is satisfied by architecture, not policy overlay. |
| ABA Formal Opinion 512 (2024) | Generative AI use is governed by competence, confidentiality, supervision, and candor obligations. Attorneys must understand how AI tools handle client data. | The data handling answer is simple: it never leaves your network. Supervision obligations are supported by immutable audit logging of every AI interaction. |
| ABA Model Rule 1.1 (Competence) | Competence includes understanding the benefits and risks of relevant technology, including AI tools used in the practice of law. | Every interaction is traceable to source material. Attorneys can review AI reasoning and understand exactly what documentation informed a response. |
| ABA Model Rule 5.1 / 5.3 (Supervision) | Partners and managing partners must supervise subordinate attorneys and nonlawyer assistants, including their use of AI tools. | Comprehensive audit logging provides supervisory visibility into AI-assisted work. Matter-level access controls prevent unsupervised access to restricted information. |
| State Bar AI Ethics Opinions | State bars in California, New York, Florida, and others have issued AI-specific guidance emphasizing confidentiality, vendor due diligence, and client disclosure obligations. | Because no client data reaches a third-party vendor, vendor due diligence obligations and client disclosure requirements around external AI processing do not apply. |
| Work Product Doctrine | Work product prepared in anticipation of litigation may lose protection if shared with a third party who is not aligned with the client's legal interests. | Work product never leaves the firm's or organization's network. There is no third-party transmission to analyze under the doctrine. |
Common Questions
The privilege analysis is fact-specific and jurisdiction-dependent, but the risk is real and documented. Courts and bar ethics committees have noted that transmitting confidential client information to third-party cloud services may constitute a voluntary disclosure to a non-privileged party. When AI runs inside your firm's network, no client information leaves your control. There is no third-party transmission, and the privilege analysis does not arise.
ABA Model Rule 1.6 requires lawyers to make reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized disclosure of client information. ABA Formal Opinion 512 (2024) on generative AI clarifies that attorneys must apply competence and confidentiality obligations to AI tool selection itself. State bar ethics opinions in California, New York, Florida, and others have reinforced this. Using cloud AI tools that transmit client data to external servers without thorough vendor evaluation and client disclosure creates professional responsibility exposure that most firms are not actively managing.
Because Lumen runs entirely inside your firm's or organization's network, work product and client matter information never leaves the protected environment. Your existing matter management and access controls govern who can query which information. The system can be configured to respect matter-level access restrictions, ensuring attorneys and staff only surface information they are permitted to access. Confidentiality walls between matters are enforced architecturally, not by policy alone.
In-house legal teams at financial services companies, healthcare organizations, and other regulated enterprises face a dual burden: their own professional responsibility obligations under applicable bar rules and their employer's sector-specific regulatory requirements. Lumen deploys inside the enterprise's existing network, inheriting both the company's IT governance controls and the legal department's matter access configurations. No client or privileged information flows to external vendors. See our Banking & Financial Services and Healthcare pages for sector-specific detail.
New business intake and conflict checking involves some of the most sensitive information a firm handles: prospective client identities, adverse parties, and matter descriptions. Processing this data through a cloud AI creates confidentiality exposure before the client relationship even begins. Lumen indexes your firm's internal conflict databases and matter management systems so intake AI workflows stay entirely within the firm's walls. The analysis runs inside your environment; nothing about the prospective engagement is transmitted externally.
Most firm and in-house deployments go live in four weeks, with full rollout in 90 days. Cognetryx includes white-glove onboarding, staff and attorney training, and 30 days of on-site support at go-live. For law firms, we also support presentations to firm leadership and IT steering committees. Timeline depends on infrastructure readiness, the scope of matter data and precedent libraries to be integrated, and the number of practice groups in the initial deployment.
Privilege & Confidentiality
Cloud AI creates data flows that attorney-client privilege was never designed to govern. Here is what that exposure looks like in practice.
Research & Accuracy
Even AI built for legal research gets up to one in three queries wrong. Why it happens, and what grounded, cited answers change.
Deployment & Architecture
What "private" actually means architecturally, how the third-party doctrine applies to cloud AI queries, and what to ask vendors before deploying.
A 30-minute live demo. We reply within 24 hours.
See it in action