Legal · case study
We mapped every Supreme Court opinion and its hierarchy to give our agents the structure of the law.
Every new opinion enters a network built by the cases before it. As citations accumulate, doctrines emerge, split, overlap, and reorganize. That structure becomes part of our research system by helping our agents find central authorities, trace doctrinal neighborhoods, and follow connections that ordinary methods miss.
The law is a network. We build for that.
Legal research usually treats cases as documents: search the text, retrieve a result, read it.
But precedent is relational. Cases cite, distinguish, narrow, revive, and cluster around one another. Those relationships contain information that the text alone does not. We use graph theory to recover that structure and turn it into something useful: doctrinal neighborhoods, influential authorities, unusual connections, changes over time, and better ways to navigate a body of law.
Supreme Court citation network showing how cases connect and cluster into doctrinal communities and their hierarchy.
Your body of law is not this one
Same method, your record.