Verifiable Legal Intelligence

For teams where one wrong quote ends careers

Every answer cited. Every conflict flagged.

Statutes, regulations, and matter files in one workspace — proven to the section, with disagreements kept in plain sight.

The signature

A landlord must give at least 30 days' written notice before a rent increase of 10% or lessCiv. Code §1947.12(h), and 90 days' notice for increases above 10%Civ. Code §827(b)(3)

The signature

How much notice is required before a residential rent increase?

A landlord must give at least 30 days' written notice before a rent increase of 10% or less, and 90 days' notice for increases above 10%. Rent-controlled units follow their local ordinance instead. Every figure above links to the exact section it came from.

Civ. Code §1947.12(h) · as amended 2024
A landlord shall provide notice of an increase in rent of 10 percent or less at least 30 days prior to the effective date of the increase.

Three ways legal answers fail.

ArcLegal is built to prevent each one — by construction, not by hope.

One wrong quote

A misremembered passage, confidently delivered. ArcLegal attaches the source to every line so nothing ships unproven.

One stale regulation

The rule changed last quarter. ArcLegal answers as-of the date that matters, not from a model's training cut-off.

One missed conflict

Two authorities disagree and no one noticed. ArcLegal surfaces the contradiction instead of silently picking a side.

Contradictions are features, not bugs

When authorities disagree, you see both.

State statute

Annual increase capped at 5% + CPI.

vs

Local ordinance

Annual increase capped at 3%, flat.

Conflict detected — both authorities kept visible

Home-rule precedence: the stricter local ordinance controls within city limits. ArcLegal shows the reasoning and keeps both authorities visible — it never hides the conflict.

Time matters

Ask what the law required — on the date that mattered.

As of Mar 2022 · §B in force

12-month limitation applies; tolling permitted during declared emergencies.

Capabilities

Eight capabilities. One place to run legal intelligence.

Research and matter work with section-level proof — adapted to how legal teams actually work.

§1947.12(h)
§827(b)(3)
§7060.2

Section-level citations

Quoted passages link to the exact section in statute or matter file — not a vector guess.

Your tenant
Privileged draft — stays
Verified conclusion →
Co-counselreceives conclusions only

Privilege-safe sharing

Export and exchange respect matter walls and ethical walls by policy.

Question

What notice period applies?

Sources

§1947.12(h), §827(b)(3)

Memo

30-day / 90-day analysis

Research replay

Audit the path from question to memo — for malpractice and regulatory review.

State5% + CPI
Local3% flat

Source conflicts

When codes, regs, and precedent disagree, all views stay visible.

Temporal accuracy

See what applied when — not what a model vaguely remembers.

Co-counsel summaries

Verified conclusions flow; privileged drafts stay in your boundary.

DMS integrations

Connect the document systems you already use — content stays sovereign.

Matter health

Open issues, deadlines, and evidence gaps in one view.

Where the work happens

A matter workstation, not another search box.

Corpus, chronology, and drafts on one surface — where litigation and advisory teams actually work.

  • Matter overview

    Entities, filings, and open questions for a matter — not a pile of PDFs in shared drives.

  • Research queue

    Prioritize open issues; uncertain answers escalate to attorneys with the passages that matter.

  • Signed advice

    Memos and client updates link to primary sources — who approved language, and which sections apply.

Matter workstation

Corpus

Chronology

Drafts

3 open issues · 2 pending reviews

Trust you can audit

A legal conclusion climbs from raw extract to anchored proof.

Each rung adds evidence. L5 is anchored to public consensus — verify it yourself.

L5Anchored — Hedera consensus
L4Expert reviewed
L3Verified (GOLAG)
L2Corroborated by multiple sources
L1Raw extract

Hedera Anchor · Testnet

ArcLegal reference anchor

Claims622 conclusions anchored · live on Hedera testnet
Topic0.0.7911130 · sequence #622
Transaction0.0.7859701@1779984649.186284461
Merkle rootce857b…e950
Cost$0.0001

Testnet today. Mainnet this cycle.

Data sovereignty is sacred

Share verified conclusions with co-counsel — not your files.

Privileged work product stays in your tenant. Only verified legal conclusions, with their provenance, cross the boundary.

Stays in your tenant

  • Privileged drafts & memos
  • Raw matter files
  • Client identities & strategy
flows

Crosses to co-counsel

  • Verified conclusions (L3+)
  • Citation provenance
  • Anchored proof references

Trusted on real matters, not just in demos.

Notes from teams who stopped shipping legal work without a source attached.

100%Answers carry a primary-source citation
L1→L5Trust ladder, anchored to public consensus
0Privileged files leave your tenant
$0.0001Per-conclusion anchor cost on Hedera

Pricing built around your organization.

Contract-only — no self-checkout. We scope to your corpora and privilege model.

Pilot

30–90 day evaluation on a sample of your matters.

Contract

Standard deployment, scoped to your practice and integrations.

Enterprise

Federation, Hedera anchoring, and cross-team intelligence.

Contract-only — we scope to your corpora and privilege model.

Partners stopped asking if we had a source — the source was attached to every draft.

Managing Partner

AmLaw 200 firm

ARKIVIST

Pilot ArcLegal on your matters.

We align to your corpora and privilege model, then show cited research and review trails on your own work.