Company · Scenarios

How a working week could look.

Five scenarios, from a two-partner regional practice to a firm reading its first monthly security report. Every firm here is fictional, and every step is marked with where it stands today, so you can see exactly what you could try in the beta and what is still to come.

Scenario 1 · Wattle Creek Law (TEST)

A two-partner regional firm keeps everything on its own server

Two partners and a paralegal in a regional town, with wills, estates and family law files they have promised clients will never leave the office.

The firm administrator registers the firm and chooses the Maximum confidentiality level. No data-sovereignty warning appears, because nothing will leave the server.
Built, in alpha testing
The partners load their precedents and research. Search runs entirely on the firm's server.
Built, in alpha testing
A partner asks a research question about a family provision claim and gets the relevant passages from the firm's own material, each with an AGLC4 footnote.
Built, in alpha testing
Written answers from the local model replace passages once the local model passes our evaluation.
In development
The firm runs on its own Linux server, installed and provisioned from the installer.
Planned

The outcome. The partners can tell clients, truthfully, that their files and questions stay in the office.

The limits. Answers are a research aid; the partners still read the authorities and give the advice.

Scenario 2 · Arcadia Legal Partners (TEST)

A mid-size firm goes from question to signed-off draft

A 40-person commercial firm. A senior associate needs a research memo on a limitation question for a client matter, and a letter of advice built on it.

The matter is opened in PracticeIQ and gets its permanent matter code, which LexIQ shares.
Built, in alpha testing
The associate asks for a research memo. LexIQ answers from the firm's own sources, with AGLC4 footnotes that pinpoint the paragraph or section.
Built, in alpha testing
Where the sources are thin, the answer says so rather than inventing authority.
Built, in alpha testing
The associate turns the memo into a draft letter stored against the matter and shares it with the supervising partner for review.
Built, in alpha testing
The partner signs off; only then can the draft be exported.
Built, in alpha testing
The same steps from inside PracticeIQ, on the matter's research and drafts screens.
Built, in alpha testing
The AI cost of the work shown on the matter.
Planned

The outcome. A memo and a letter the partner has checked and signed, both on the matter.

The limits. The practitioner remains responsible for checking every authority before relying on it, and court rules on AI use still apply.

Scenario 3 · Marlow Matters (TEST)

A firm administrator handles a confidential matter and a retention request

A firm on the Standard level takes on a sensitive regulatory investigation, and a former client asks what the firm still holds about them.

The administrator marks the new matter confidential and sets the firm's rule to block any outside call for confidential matters.
Built, in alpha testing
Questions asked in that matter are answered without any hosted call; the block is enforced by the code, not by a setting someone must remember.
Built, in alpha testing
For the former client, the administrator exports what the firm holds about that person; any erasure is the firm administrator's confirmed decision once the retention period allows.
In development
A matter under legal hold is kept out of retention review until the hold is lifted.
Built, in alpha testing
Client text is sealed with the firm's own key, so erasure becomes final once backups age out.
In development

The outcome. The investigation's material never leaves the firm, and the privacy request is answered with a record of what was done.

The limits. Whether the firm must keep a record longer under its own obligations is the firm's decision, not the software's.

Scenario 4 · Harbourline Legal (TEST)

A firm is told about an attack on its accounts, and reads its monthly report

A 25-person firm whose managing partner reports to the partners on cyber risk every quarter.

AegisIQ detects a burst of failed sign-ins against the firm's accounts from several addresses.
In development
The firm administrator sees a notification in PracticeIQ saying what happened, the risk to the firm, and what, if anything, to do.
In development
The address is blocked at the platform's own boundary for a set time; nothing is done to the attacking machines.
Planned
The system administrator receives an immediate alert and approves any larger action.
Planned
At month end the firm receives a report covering only threats to the firm, which the managing partner takes to the partners' meeting.
In development

The outcome. The firm learns of an attack on it from its own tools, with a record it can use for its own breach assessment.

The limits. Whether a breach is notifiable remains a person's decision; AegisIQ supplies the evidence.

Scenario 5 · Ironbark Lawyers (TEST)

An on-premises firm provisions the Windows self-host edition

A firm whose client agreements require all data on its own Windows servers.

The firm's IT provider runs the provisioning application on a Windows server the firm owns.
Planned
The application creates the firm, its administrator and its keys, and asks for the confidentiality level.
Planned
Matters are imported from the firm's existing system as a dry run first, never widening who can see a matter.
Built, in alpha testing
Corpus releases arrive as signed, versioned packages the site can verify.
Planned

The outcome. The firm runs the same software as the cloud, inside its own walls.

The limits. The Windows self-host edition is planned; no date is set.

Want your firm to be a real case study?

Register your firm for a trial in the beta programme. The first real stories on this page will be written with firms who try it.