Most firms can't answer that. Ratia can. We build the tools and services that measure legal AI against the court-adjudicated record — is the case it cites real, did it read the holding correctly, is it still good law — so you get AI's enormous upside without betting your name on an unverified answer.
On the list. You'll see the Minnesota results first.
Something went wrong — please try again.
Early access is opening to a small group of design partners.
Every legal-AI tool reports impressive accuracy. Almost none of it is measured against what a court actually held. Ratia audits a tool's output — the citation, the characterization of the holding, the claim about current validity — against the court-adjudicated record itself, at the pincite. Not the headnote. Not an editorial summary. The opinion.
Read the full methodology · See the audits · Who Ratia is for · Read our writing
A Minnesota pilot is underway, with ground truth built from the state's court-adjudicated record. We're starting in one jurisdiction, proving the measurement, and opening it to a small group of design partners before it goes wider.
Built on the conviction that grounding is measurable — and that someone independent has to measure it.
On the list. You'll see the Minnesota results first.
Something went wrong — please try again.
No spam. One note when early access opens.