Legal AI assistant411 voices on recordlatest Oct 19, 2026152 like · 84 mixed · 142 dislike
Last signal: Oct 19, 2026, a voice. newest voice Oct 19, 2026; newest release on record Aug 5, 2025; newest official statement read Aug 20, 2026. No vendor price is published here.
The most named complaint is accuracy (148 of 411 voices); the most valued thing is time saved (55). The band crosses zero: the record does not say yet whether lawyers lean for or against it. 1 voice comes from Hacker News, 397 from Reddit and 13 from Bluesky, Mastodon, Lemmy and Stack Exchange.
What they’re saying · verbatim, newest first
r/Lawyertalk
“I use CoCounsel extensively as a corporate associate. It is very good.”
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixedThe Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is. (summary, not a quote)open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixed“I ran a 40 lawyer pilot recently and came away impressed. Expected to hate it based on what I read, but the updated platform they rolled out in August is much better.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“The legal knowledge and database of citations and flags with Claude’s reasoning models can't be beat.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselValues“I attended a demo of Westlaw's CoCounsel a few weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The last time I ran a prompt through cocounsel, its output was that I should consult an attorney.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It can find cases that answer your question very well. But it can’t understand the significance of anything it finds, making it useless for drafting.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“In my opinion, it’s not enough better than a top tier ChatGPT subscription to be worth paying the price Thompson Reuters is asking.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's good - based off Claude - with LN resources (if you've paid and have access to them, of course). It's as perfectly mediocre as you'd expect.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The partner I’m working with LOVES Cocounsel and I consistently struggle to make it do what I need it to do. Almost always faster to do it myself.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselNeutral“No way to save instructions that I know of.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“From my experience, CoCounsel can reliably analyze facts/input I provide it with general legal concepts, but lacks the capacity to narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“I think it’s overpriced for what it does. But that’s based on my free trial a couple of months ago.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's pretty good for broadly picking stuff out of there but connected Claude can't see it which is a bummer.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026ClaudeValues“I've reduced understating/overstating significantly through those.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“Just act like it’s a law clerk and know you’re going to have to wade thru some crap to get things professional.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's got access to resources but the actual AI of it doesn't seem any better than the other products out there.”open
r/Lawyertalk
“I ran a 40 lawyer pilot recently and came away impressed. Expected to hate it based on what I read, but the updated platform they rolled out in August is much better.”
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixedThe Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is. (summary, not a quote)open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“The legal knowledge and database of citations and flags with Claude’s reasoning models can't be beat.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“I use CoCounsel extensively as a corporate associate. It is very good.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselValues“I attended a demo of Westlaw's CoCounsel a few weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The last time I ran a prompt through cocounsel, its output was that I should consult an attorney.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It can find cases that answer your question very well. But it can’t understand the significance of anything it finds, making it useless for drafting.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“In my opinion, it’s not enough better than a top tier ChatGPT subscription to be worth paying the price Thompson Reuters is asking.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's good - based off Claude - with LN resources (if you've paid and have access to them, of course). It's as perfectly mediocre as you'd expect.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The partner I’m working with LOVES Cocounsel and I consistently struggle to make it do what I need it to do. Almost always faster to do it myself.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselNeutral“No way to save instructions that I know of.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“From my experience, CoCounsel can reliably analyze facts/input I provide it with general legal concepts, but lacks the capacity to narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“I think it’s overpriced for what it does. But that’s based on my free trial a couple of months ago.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's pretty good for broadly picking stuff out of there but connected Claude can't see it which is a bummer.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026ClaudeValues“I've reduced understating/overstating significantly through those.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“Just act like it’s a law clerk and know you’re going to have to wade thru some crap to get things professional.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's got access to resources but the actual AI of it doesn't seem any better than the other products out there.”open
r/Lawyertalk
“The legal knowledge and database of citations and flags with Claude’s reasoning models can't be beat.”
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixedThe Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is. (summary, not a quote)open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixed“I ran a 40 lawyer pilot recently and came away impressed. Expected to hate it based on what I read, but the updated platform they rolled out in August is much better.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“I use CoCounsel extensively as a corporate associate. It is very good.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselValues“I attended a demo of Westlaw's CoCounsel a few weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The last time I ran a prompt through cocounsel, its output was that I should consult an attorney.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It can find cases that answer your question very well. But it can’t understand the significance of anything it finds, making it useless for drafting.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“In my opinion, it’s not enough better than a top tier ChatGPT subscription to be worth paying the price Thompson Reuters is asking.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's good - based off Claude - with LN resources (if you've paid and have access to them, of course). It's as perfectly mediocre as you'd expect.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The partner I’m working with LOVES Cocounsel and I consistently struggle to make it do what I need it to do. Almost always faster to do it myself.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselNeutral“No way to save instructions that I know of.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“From my experience, CoCounsel can reliably analyze facts/input I provide it with general legal concepts, but lacks the capacity to narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“I think it’s overpriced for what it does. But that’s based on my free trial a couple of months ago.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's pretty good for broadly picking stuff out of there but connected Claude can't see it which is a bummer.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026ClaudeValues“I've reduced understating/overstating significantly through those.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“Just act like it’s a law clerk and know you’re going to have to wade thru some crap to get things professional.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's got access to resources but the actual AI of it doesn't seem any better than the other products out there.”open
r/Lawyertalk
“I attended a demo of Westlaw's CoCounsel a few weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed.”
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixedThe Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is. (summary, not a quote)open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixed“I ran a 40 lawyer pilot recently and came away impressed. Expected to hate it based on what I read, but the updated platform they rolled out in August is much better.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“The legal knowledge and database of citations and flags with Claude’s reasoning models can't be beat.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“I use CoCounsel extensively as a corporate associate. It is very good.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The last time I ran a prompt through cocounsel, its output was that I should consult an attorney.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It can find cases that answer your question very well. But it can’t understand the significance of anything it finds, making it useless for drafting.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“In my opinion, it’s not enough better than a top tier ChatGPT subscription to be worth paying the price Thompson Reuters is asking.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's good - based off Claude - with LN resources (if you've paid and have access to them, of course). It's as perfectly mediocre as you'd expect.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The partner I’m working with LOVES Cocounsel and I consistently struggle to make it do what I need it to do. Almost always faster to do it myself.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselNeutral“No way to save instructions that I know of.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“From my experience, CoCounsel can reliably analyze facts/input I provide it with general legal concepts, but lacks the capacity to narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“I think it’s overpriced for what it does. But that’s based on my free trial a couple of months ago.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's pretty good for broadly picking stuff out of there but connected Claude can't see it which is a bummer.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026ClaudeValues“I've reduced understating/overstating significantly through those.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“Just act like it’s a law clerk and know you’re going to have to wade thru some crap to get things professional.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's got access to resources but the actual AI of it doesn't seem any better than the other products out there.”open
r/Lawyertalk
“The partner I’m working with LOVES Cocounsel and I consistently struggle to make it do what I need it to do. Almost always faster to do it myself.”
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixedThe Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is. (summary, not a quote)open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixed“I ran a 40 lawyer pilot recently and came away impressed. Expected to hate it based on what I read, but the updated platform they rolled out in August is much better.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“The legal knowledge and database of citations and flags with Claude’s reasoning models can't be beat.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“I use CoCounsel extensively as a corporate associate. It is very good.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselValues“I attended a demo of Westlaw's CoCounsel a few weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The last time I ran a prompt through cocounsel, its output was that I should consult an attorney.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It can find cases that answer your question very well. But it can’t understand the significance of anything it finds, making it useless for drafting.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“In my opinion, it’s not enough better than a top tier ChatGPT subscription to be worth paying the price Thompson Reuters is asking.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's good - based off Claude - with LN resources (if you've paid and have access to them, of course). It's as perfectly mediocre as you'd expect.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselNeutral“No way to save instructions that I know of.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“From my experience, CoCounsel can reliably analyze facts/input I provide it with general legal concepts, but lacks the capacity to narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“I think it’s overpriced for what it does. But that’s based on my free trial a couple of months ago.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's pretty good for broadly picking stuff out of there but connected Claude can't see it which is a bummer.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026ClaudeValues“I've reduced understating/overstating significantly through those.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“Just act like it’s a law clerk and know you’re going to have to wade thru some crap to get things professional.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's got access to resources but the actual AI of it doesn't seem any better than the other products out there.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixedThe Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is. (summary, not a quote)open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixed“I ran a 40 lawyer pilot recently and came away impressed. Expected to hate it based on what I read, but the updated platform they rolled out in August is much better.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“The legal knowledge and database of citations and flags with Claude’s reasoning models can't be beat.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“I use CoCounsel extensively as a corporate associate. It is very good.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselValues“I attended a demo of Westlaw's CoCounsel a few weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The last time I ran a prompt through cocounsel, its output was that I should consult an attorney.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It can find cases that answer your question very well. But it can’t understand the significance of anything it finds, making it useless for drafting.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“In my opinion, it’s not enough better than a top tier ChatGPT subscription to be worth paying the price Thompson Reuters is asking.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's good - based off Claude - with LN resources (if you've paid and have access to them, of course). It's as perfectly mediocre as you'd expect.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The partner I’m working with LOVES Cocounsel and I consistently struggle to make it do what I need it to do. Almost always faster to do it myself.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“From my experience, CoCounsel can reliably analyze facts/input I provide it with general legal concepts, but lacks the capacity to narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“I think it’s overpriced for what it does. But that’s based on my free trial a couple of months ago.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's pretty good for broadly picking stuff out of there but connected Claude can't see it which is a bummer.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026ClaudeValues“I've reduced understating/overstating significantly through those.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“Just act like it’s a law clerk and know you’re going to have to wade thru some crap to get things professional.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's got access to resources but the actual AI of it doesn't seem any better than the other products out there.”open
r/Lawyertalk
“In my opinion, it’s not enough better than a top tier ChatGPT subscription to be worth paying the price Thompson Reuters is asking.”
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixedThe Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is. (summary, not a quote)open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixed“I ran a 40 lawyer pilot recently and came away impressed. Expected to hate it based on what I read, but the updated platform they rolled out in August is much better.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“The legal knowledge and database of citations and flags with Claude’s reasoning models can't be beat.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“I use CoCounsel extensively as a corporate associate. It is very good.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselValues“I attended a demo of Westlaw's CoCounsel a few weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The last time I ran a prompt through cocounsel, its output was that I should consult an attorney.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It can find cases that answer your question very well. But it can’t understand the significance of anything it finds, making it useless for drafting.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's good - based off Claude - with LN resources (if you've paid and have access to them, of course). It's as perfectly mediocre as you'd expect.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The partner I’m working with LOVES Cocounsel and I consistently struggle to make it do what I need it to do. Almost always faster to do it myself.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselNeutral“No way to save instructions that I know of.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“From my experience, CoCounsel can reliably analyze facts/input I provide it with general legal concepts, but lacks the capacity to narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“I think it’s overpriced for what it does. But that’s based on my free trial a couple of months ago.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's pretty good for broadly picking stuff out of there but connected Claude can't see it which is a bummer.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026ClaudeValues“I've reduced understating/overstating significantly through those.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“Just act like it’s a law clerk and know you’re going to have to wade thru some crap to get things professional.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's got access to resources but the actual AI of it doesn't seem any better than the other products out there.”open
r/Lawyertalk
“It's got access to resources but the actual AI of it doesn't seem any better than the other products out there.”
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixedThe Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is. (summary, not a quote)open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselMixed“I ran a 40 lawyer pilot recently and came away impressed. Expected to hate it based on what I read, but the updated platform they rolled out in August is much better.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“The legal knowledge and database of citations and flags with Claude’s reasoning models can't be beat.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 19, 2026CoCounselValues“I use CoCounsel extensively as a corporate associate. It is very good.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselValues“I attended a demo of Westlaw's CoCounsel a few weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The last time I ran a prompt through cocounsel, its output was that I should consult an attorney.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It can find cases that answer your question very well. But it can’t understand the significance of anything it finds, making it useless for drafting.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“In my opinion, it’s not enough better than a top tier ChatGPT subscription to be worth paying the price Thompson Reuters is asking.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's good - based off Claude - with LN resources (if you've paid and have access to them, of course). It's as perfectly mediocre as you'd expect.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselCriticizes“The partner I’m working with LOVES Cocounsel and I consistently struggle to make it do what I need it to do. Almost always faster to do it myself.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselNeutral“No way to save instructions that I know of.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“From my experience, CoCounsel can reliably analyze facts/input I provide it with general legal concepts, but lacks the capacity to narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“I think it’s overpriced for what it does. But that’s based on my free trial a couple of months ago.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“It's pretty good for broadly picking stuff out of there but connected Claude can't see it which is a bummer.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026ClaudeValues“I've reduced understating/overstating significantly through those.”open
r/Lawyertalk · Oct 18, 2026CoCounselMixed“Just act like it’s a law clerk and know you’re going to have to wade thru some crap to get things professional.”open
r/biglaw
“CoCounsel allows you to build workflows and combine with other sources too, though.”
r/biglaw · Oct 19, 2026CriticizesLegal SaaS platforms like Harvey and Legora are just wrappers around LLMs, and the author's firm built its own in-house platform and sees their valuations as unjustified. (summary, not a quote)open
r/biglaw · Oct 18, 2026HarveyValues“Boomer here, but I think Harvey is incredible.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 18, 2026HarveyValues“When you know what you are doing and what you want, Harvey is great IMO.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 17, 2026HarveyValues“The US caselaw search is better because you can combine it with other sources so you can have it look through a set of litigation documents and run caselaw research to help figure out their significance at the same time.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 17, 2026ClaudeValues“To be very clear, in my experience having these systems finely tuned to your individual work vs the level of tuning you can get out of harvey/cocounsel/co-pilot can represent 2-3x productivity increases.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 17, 2026HarveyValues“Harvey vault is amazing for working with discovery productions.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 16, 2026HarveyNeutral“Harvey also has a US Caselaw database where whichever model you pick will directly search for cases in the database.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 16, 2026CriticizesSays lawyers will not use raw coding or chat tools and need a wrapper around the model to make it usable. (summary, not a quote)open
r/biglaw · Oct 16, 2026HarveyNeutral“Harvey can be used with Astra 6 or Fable, your firm just has to agree to API pricing.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 16, 2026HarveyNeutral“Harvey uses the Chat GPT and Claude models and you can actually pick which model.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 16, 2026ChatGPTValues“What pisses me off is that our clients ARE using Claude and ChatGPT themselves and we’re stuck using these inferior models.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 16, 2026HarveyNeutral“Alls I know is that I can’t keep track of all the platforms so I stick to my mans Harvey even though the other mans might be better.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 16, 2026HarveyNeutral“You do realize that Harvey was literally just an interface to access Claude since day 1.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“Harvey and Legora are inferior products, by magnitudes, and any firm that exclusively relies on these tools is falling behind in productivity and associate satisfaction.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026ClaudeValues“If you are using Fable and you give it enough project data, it can function like your associate on that case who has a mastery of facts and super fast turnaround.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“Harvey sucks because it's just an API built on top of open-source AI models, which are way behind the models currently available through openAI or Claude.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizesYounger lawyers who grew up with general AI tools would be disadvantaged by using Harvey, while older lawyers can be forgiven for adopting it. (summary, not a quote)open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“This is basically a fine tuned version of the Kimi K3 model which they claim is better but is clearly worse”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyNeutral“Harvey does have its own propriety model. And yes, if you select a specific model, only the output is generated by that model, not all of the intervening tasks.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyNeutral“There is no “Harvey” model. Harvey just picks one of the models based on your prompt.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyMixed“I like to think of Harvey as an energetic junior, does their best, a fine starting point, but doesn’t produce a product I’d be willing to send a client without a deeeep review”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyValues“Harvey's been killing it for me on the transaction side with the rote drafting and title work.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026CoCounselValues“I’ve been really impressed and don’t see how a tool could be much better”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026CoCounselValues“I’ve been really impressed and don’t see how a tool could be much better”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyValues“I use Harvey daily and think it’s a fantastic product (as long as you use it to supplement, not replace your work product)”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026CoCounselValues“I use co counsel for litigation and i find it is much more accurate for litigation research than claude, chatgpt, or gemini.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026Westlaw AIValues“I use co counsel for litigation and i find it is much more accurate for litigation research than claude, chatgpt, or gemini.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“Even when I add docs to a vault and ask for a review table, getting Harvey to actually “read” the docs is like pulling teeth.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026ClaudeValues“Claude code with a syfert.com MCP (or a courtlistener MCP, or ding duff) is 500% better than Harvey and Legora.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyMixed“It’s usually right but the times it isn’t it’s REALLY wrong.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“I also do not think I’m getting real Opus 5 when I select it in Harvey. And it’s hella slow.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“Harvey profits by arbitrating token costs, so they use the cheapest models they think can get away with for the bulk of response.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“They came out years later than Harvey, when firms already adopted Harvey, but yeah, firms should abandon Harveyw”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026CoCounselValues“My firm has Harvey and CoCounsel, and I just use CC bc it has access to Westlaw.”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“It routinely gives me genuinely “lazy” answers that fail to address what are obviously critical aspects of the issue, in a way that is not true of Fable or Astra”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“The only reason firms choose Harvey is it doesn’t use our data to train its AI due to confidentiality, or else they are trash”open
r/biglaw · Oct 15, 2026HarveyCriticizes“All other tasks, such as the actual research, review, etc, are handled by whatever model Harvey wants, including their own shitty “proprietary” models.”open
Hacker News
“I work at a law firm and CoCounsel[1] is pretty good.”
in “Higher-paid employees looking for work are having a tough time”
After a 40-lawyer pilot, the author found the updated CoCounsel impressive and best for work touching the law, though Harvey and Legora are better for nuanced drafting.
The Westlaw-backed knowledge base is the real selling point, but drafting and Q&A features are not much better than a well-prompted Claude, so value depends on how research-heavy the practice is.
Still uses CoCounsel for Westlaw's larger database and citator checks, but says it sometimes overstates, understates or reverses the holdings of decisions, so it must be treated like a law clerk whose work needs review.
CoCounsel is a decent out-of-the-box option but overpriced, since a cheaper subscription plus a Claude Pro plan does more for a user who can set up projects.
CoCounsel produces first-draft-quality discovery requests and handles general legal concepts from supplied facts, but cannot narrowly analyze or apply specific case law.
Believes CoCounsel may be usable through Claude or OpenAI with the right subscription but knows of no way to save instructions, and is frustrated with Westlaw over its response to their code downloads.
CoCounsel is very good at finding information in large document sets and case law, but cannot grasp the significance of what it finds, so it is useless for drafting.
During a two-week free trial, CoCounsel only told the author to consult an attorney, so the firm chose another product, though it may have improved since.
CoCounsel is more accurate for litigation research than Claude, ChatGPT or Gemini, which the author attributes to its use of human-written headnotes and practice guides.
CoCounsel drafts briefs and motions like a fourth- or fifth-year associate and researches like a second- or third-year, often catching missed points, though it can be incomplete.
CoCounsel drafts briefs and motions at roughly a senior associate level, is rarely wrong though sometimes incomplete, and often catches issues the author missed.
The author reports that CoCounsel produced a brief conclusion that called one party by two names and misstated the argument, and says AI is a tool that needs skill to use.
A class action lawyer finds AI tools often wrong or off the mark so time savings are limited, but likes Westlaw's CoCounsel for the few things it does well.
A litigator says the analysis and drafting quality of CoCounsel and similar tools has improved sharply in recent months and worries about their own relevance as a lawyer.
Using CourtListener and the CoCounsel connector with a final ClearBrief pass, citations are about 99.5% correct and no hallucinated case has appeared in months.
Says CoCounsel 1.0 and 2.0 were poor but 3.0 is much better, and expects it to win thanks to its case law base, with Harvey fine for transactional work and Legora mainly for Europe.
Explains how to set up the CoCounsel SharePoint connector with a dedicated site, a restricted test account and the permissions Thomson Reuters documents.
In a trial, Westlaw CoCounsel looks as good as Claude Team with better case law access and quick, seemingly accurate research, and is worth the extra $300 per seat per month.
CoCounsel is unreliable for legal research: it invented holdings, denied that real statutes exist, and gave poor litigation advice instead of researching the motion to strike.
Argues that legal AI contracts, including CoCounsel's, disclaim reliability for entertainment purposes only, contradicting advertising, and that this limitation is inherent to LLMs.
The author finds CoCounsel a good starting place for legal research that pulls relevant statutes and caselaw, but says it sometimes gives explanations without citations that still require digging.
The author says some firms over-rely on CoCounsel, citing a firm facing a $20,000 sanctions hearing for citing hallucinated cases in a suit against a city.
CoCounsel is the tool this legal tech attorney would buy because of its Westlaw integration and more accurate output, despite a clunkier interface than Harvey.
The first version of CoCounsel Legal was subpar, but early feedback on the new version built on Westlaw and Claude is very positive because it narrows the verification gap.
Values that CoCounsel drafts only from uploaded sources so it cannot invent cases, but it struggles with file uploads and restricts too many file types for document-heavy matters.
Reports CoCounsel drafts are verbose, ignore explicit instructions and templates, with some improvement after reporting issues, and hopes the new version fixes this.
AI speeds up finding the first key case and procedural rules, but most tools retain data and risk waiving privilege, so the author avoids entering confidential information and notes only a few, such as Westlaw CoCounsel, have zero data retention.
Notes that the terms of use for CoCounsel and similar tools disclaim fitness for purpose, and finds it odd that courts presume legal-marketed products are fit for legal work.
Found CoCounsel and Westlaw's deep research only an acceptable first cut and gets better results faster from traditional secondary authorities such as the Rutter Group guides.
CoCounsel's cite checking is a useful feature, but it is slow enough to disrupt the lawyer's workflow, and Gemini often feels slower than a plain search.
CoCounsel produced an accurate, well-structured memo in five minutes that beat a student's month-long work, though the lawyer's own memo was more tailored.
CoCounsel and Lexis+ AI are real, improving drafting products built on their own legal content, but they cannot easily work from the firm's own matter documents.
CoCounsel does poorly at indexing large documents, medical chronologies and discovery responses, and creates more work through the time spent fixing its output.
The author notes that CoCounsel appears to act as a black box handling research end-to-end, so it is unclear what Claude adds beyond triggering searches.
The author criticizes Westlaw's CoCounsel AI as expensive, producing poor search results and only basic pleadings, while requiring upload of privileged notes and protected client medical records.
The author says the next CoCounsel is a Claude wrapper with Westlaw retrieval added and questions whether it justifies a price of over a million dollars a year compared with direct model access.
The author's firm raised concerns about CoCounsel's cost and performance, and argues Thomson Reuters should build an MCP server itself if it truly served its users.
The author says Thomson Reuters appears to block Claude access to Westlaw to push firms toward CoCounsel, which damages trust, and thinks Anthropic's move into the application layer weakens wrappers.
Thomson Reuters is offering AI products like CoCounsel and owns the data behind grounded answers, but as a large incumbent it will move more slowly and market less than startups like Harvey.
Lexis's AI usually gets useful results faster as an added research step, while CoCounsel's outputs are mostly useless or wrong and worse than a general-purpose model.
The author says CoCounsel sometimes gives excellent research answers but once gave contradictory conclusions, and the cost of errors outweighs the times it is right.
The author says CoCounsel works well for medical records and discovery such as deposition transcripts, is confidential and HIPAA compliant, and does not invent cases, so it is worth the cost over non-legal AI.
CoCounsel kept splitting entries and scrambling dates despite prompt tuning, so they moved medical chronology work elsewhere but still use it for other tasks.
Westlaw's CoCounsel works like a capable second-year associate, and its update-contract-terms feature cuts redrafting a PSA from a letter of intent from about two hours to under an hour of review.
The author, a former seller of legal research tools, says CoCounsel is usually bundled with Westlaw so firms do not know their real per-seat cost, that Harvey's lower tier is an entry point before an upsell, and that answer quality drops on long documents.
A former seller says CoCounsel looked good in scripted demos but gives inconsistent results on repeated research queries, though it has improved and works as a starting point rather than a replacement for research workflow.
Argues that with limited data sets and good prompting CoCounsel no longer shows high hallucination rates, and says a paralegal agent they built removed most of the human work on reporting tasks.
CoCounsel cuts drafting time by 50-70% for solo practitioners, but hallucinations and ethics rules will slow adoption, so it is a tool and not a replacement.
CoCounsel is best placed because it bundles with existing Thomson Reuters relationships and Westlaw content, while Harvey and Legora depend on delivering integrations and measurable quality.
In the author's experience CoCounsel is better for litigation and research while Harvey and Legora are better for drafting, though the products are converging.
CoCounsel looks best in class because its answers come from Westlaw citations, whereas Harvey and Legora drawing only on firm libraries makes their drafting strength doubtful.
The author finds the quoted per-seat price for the CoCounsel Legal package far above the website's own pricing and notes that its drafting skill does not consult legal sources, so references must be verified.
CoCounsel is not much better than basic GPT and still hallucinates even when connected to Westlaw, and Lexis is worse, while legal startups work on legal reasoning.
CoCounsel was promised to summarize medical records and deposition transcripts but failed on a medical billing record, which the author could not put into ChatGPT because of patient information.
AI works without research databases for contract review and summarization using internal data, but for legal research and drafting the case law coverage matters, and CoCounsel's was incomplete.
Westlaw's CoCounsel seemed completely useless during a trial, though other AI tools impressed the author for limited tasks like cataloging documents and first drafts.
A solo lawyer likes CoCounsel for saving time on insurance demands and medical record review, but warns of poor customer service and months of unresolved over-billing after upgrading from Westlaw.
After using Spellbook and CoCounsel, the author finds that interfaces encouraging automatic acceptance of changes hinder adoption, and a traceable checklist approach would be trusted more.
CoCounsel is good at surfacing issues and suggesting language, but the lawyer still has to choose, reject and rework the output through several rounds before it is client-ready.
The author avoids ChatGPT for case digestion and prefers legal-specific tools like CoCounsel and Spellbook because their output is easier to check and stays grounded in the filings.
Likes Westlaw's CoCounsel and vLex Vincent for litigation, and thinks ChatGPT would do as well for simple demand letters if the company permits its use.
The author finds CoCounsel good for document review, comparisons, timelines and summaries, but only okay for legal research and useful as a starting point only.
CoCounsel's new drafting feature was about as good as ChatGPT but nowhere near a complete work product, so the author doubts AI will change legal practice much.
Specialized legal AI like CoCounsel is mainly useful for security and closed-universe use with sensitive documents, but its work product is weak and needs very specific prompts.
A former Casetext employee says the original CoCounsel did not hallucinate because it drew on existing case collections, but believes Thomson Reuters replaced it with its own generative product.
As in-house counsel, finds CoCounsel imperfect but trustworthy thanks to detailed footnote citations, more secure than general LLMs, and far superior to Lexis' AI.
Westlaw Deep Research is far better than ChatGPT for starting research, and CoCounsel helps catch errors in briefs, but AI shouldn't replace lawyers and its limits should be understood.
CoCounsel is a decent shortcut for broad overviews but weak for specific research and not worth $400 a month; other firm tools handle discovery and summaries better.
Westlaw's AI research tool is life-changing and safer against fake cases, but CoCounsel isn't yet worth the money and misses things in summaries and drafting.
The standalone CoCounsel is valuable for document work like proofreading briefs and comparing 500-page contracts, and Westlaw's Deep Research is good at the law, while the in-Westlaw version is not amazing.
CoCounsel failed to produce a requested medical summary table that ChatGPT created correctly, so the firm is looking at a plaintiff-focused alternative.
Finds CoCounsel useful and improving, and values Westlaw's unpublished case access, but is angry about repeated price hikes for new features and may switch to cheaper AI like Paxton.
Sanctions stem from relying on ChatGPT's cases, while AI is far more useful for drafting contracts and settlement agreements, as Westlaw CoCounsel does.
The author is disappointed with CoCounsel, finds it not yet good enough, and keeps going back to ChatGPT even though client information cannot be entered into it.
CoCounsel is poor at brainstorming from a fact pattern but quick at finding the headnote you need, so use another AI to think through the issue and CoCounsel to check it, while still verifying CoCounsel's output.
CoCounsel is useful for document comparison, review and timelines and is less likely to cite fake cases, but some research answers were wrong, so it needs caution.
Meh on CoCounsel because it is too limited, but useful for Westlaw users who want to stay in that environment, and Westlaw's AI research tool is decent and less prone to hallucination.
The author hates CoCounsel after it failed to produce a useful document index with correct page numbers, wasting an hour, and their attorney refuses to use it.
Dislikes CoCounsel without having been required to use it, expecting its automation to be as problem-ridden as Clio's, so they are not worried about being replaced.
Another trial attorney saw CoCounsel hallucinate in document summaries and give a confidently wrong FLSA answer, so the firm will revisit it in 2-3 years.
The author is glad to have CoCounsel and says it works from uploaded materials, while noting partners at the firm have mixed feelings and need training on prompting.
The author's firm tested CoCounsel, and attorneys reportedly did not find the tested parts useful, though the author does not know whether hallucinations occurred.
Finds CoCounsel decent but believes attorneys can build similar tools directly on AI vendors' business plans, with CoCounsel's advantage being case access and UI.
CoCounsel's RAG grounding in Westlaw/Lexis makes it hallucinate less than ChatGPT and gives better results, but neither is perfect, so the author uses both.
CoCounsel speeds up litigation tasks like depositions but is too expensive and makes errors needing human validation; Harvey was too pricey, and Copilot needs training.
CoCounsel is better than general chatbots for litigation work because it is integrated with Westlaw, and attorneys over-trust AI output, which has led to sanctions.
Lawyers should use AI only in systems with confidentiality guardrails, such as CoCounsel, because feeding client data into free ChatGPT risks violating ethical duties.
CoCounsel uses retrieval-augmented generation with a near-zero hallucination rate and can outperform most attorneys at rote drafting, review and summarizing, though it sometimes misses fine points like the effect of plurality opinions.
Other tools filed under Legal AI assistant, ordered by net score (like minus dislike per 100 voices), each with its 90% band and how many voices it rests on. A tool under 10 voices is listed, not rated. No one pays for a place here.
Only what the vendor or the model provider says on its own pages, read on Oct 22, 2026. “Not disclosed” means we found no official statement.
Tool
Model
Status
Period
What the official page says
CoCounsel
Anthropic Claude Agent SDK (next-gen CoCounsel Legal)
Uses
as of 2026-08-20
Thomson Reuters says the next-generation CoCounsel Legal is built on Anthropic's Claude Agent SDK; Tabular Analysis uses a TR proprietary legal LLM. Source Thomson Reuters Launches Next Generation of CoCounsel Legal, Aug 20, 2026
CoCounsel
Claude (Anthropic), GPT (OpenAI), Gemini (Google) plus proprietary
Uses
as of 2026-02-24
TR states it works with frontier models from Anthropic, OpenAI and Google combined with its own proprietary AI. Source One Million Professionals Turn to CoCounsel as Thomson Reuters Scales AI for Regulated Industries, Feb 24, 2026
CoCounsel
OpenAI o1-mini (custom), GPT-4, Claude 3.5 (evaluated), Gemini 1.5 Pro
Used
2023-2024
TR said CoCounsel was tested with a custom OpenAI o1-mini model, launched on GPT-4, was evaluating Claude 3.5 models, and integrated Gemini 1.5 Pro. Source Thomson Reuters CoCounsel tests custom LLM from OpenAI, broadening its multi-model product strategy, Nov 25, 2024
CoCounsel
Google Gemini 1.5 Pro (testing)
Used
2024-08
CoCounsel 2.0 release said TR was testing adding Gemini 1.5 Pro to its production models suite, alongside OpenAI. Source Thomson Reuters unveils CoCounsel 2.0, Aug 12, 2024
What lawyers asked CoCounsel to add, and what shipped
16 distinct asks from 18 voices; 3 followed by an official release note we could verify. An ask with no match means we found no official page, not that nothing shipped. Official pages re-read: Oct 22, 2026.
