Every lawyer has now heard the horror stories: briefs filed with cases that do not exist. The lesson most people draw is the wrong one.
The problem was never AI. It was AI reaching beyond what it was given. A general chatbot is a prediction engine; asked for authority, it generates the most plausible-sounding citation whether or not it exists.
A different design removes the problem
CaseFilter reads only the evidence you upload, and nothing else. There is no outside universe of case law for it to get wrong, because it never looks there. It is not a research tool; it is an analysis tool pointed entirely at your own file.
Because it never leaves your file, there is no external source for it to fabricate.
Ask when a defendant first mentioned a vehicle, and the answer comes back quoted and linked to the exact page. That single design choice is what makes the output trustworthy.
Verification is the whole game
A link behind every answer collapses the distance between ‘the AI said so’ and ‘I checked.’ You click, you land on the source, and you decide. That is the only workflow that belongs near a real case.