How to Verify AI Case Citations Before Filing

01 / PRACTICE NOTES

Use a citation ledger for the draft.

Create a table with one row per authority: case name, court, date, citation, proposition, pinpoint, source URL and review status. Add a column for subsequent treatment and another for the factual proposition the authority supports. The ledger makes the review concrete and shareable.

Review citations in the final draft itself. A source checked in an earlier conversation may have been changed or attached to a different proposition during revision.

1. Extract every authority from the final draft.
2. Open the opinion through an official source or your research service.
3. Match identity, court, date and docket or reporter details.
4. Read the cited passage and its surrounding reasoning.
5. Check subsequent history and treatment.
6. Confirm the proposition and update the final pinpoint citation.

02 / PRACTICE NOTES

Confirm the case and its procedural posture.

A matching case name is the start of the check. Confirm the court, date and document type: an order on a motion, an appellate opinion and a magistrate recommendation occupy different roles. Identify the claim and standard actually before the court.

Read the disposition. A discussion of an argument the court rejected should be attributed to that argument, rather than adopted as the court’s holding. Record the distinction in the ledger.

03 / PRACTICE NOTES

Compare quotations word for word.

Open the source at the pinpoint page or paragraph. Compare the quotation against the original, preserving the meaning of omissions and alterations. Read the adjacent text to check whether a qualification changes the proposition.

For scanned documents, use the opinion’s printed pagination when the citation format calls for it. A PDF viewer’s page counter may differ from the reporter or slip-opinion page.

04 / PRACTICE NOTES

Check subsequent treatment and the forum relationship.

Use your available citator and primary authorities to review reversal, vacatur, amendments, superseding statutes and later treatment. Save the check date. A source’s accessibility establishes its identity; the treatment review establishes how you plan to use it now.

Explain why the authority belongs in this brief: binding on the forum, persuasive on the same issue or relevant to the legal history. State the relationship in the analysis, rather than leaving the reader to infer it from the citation.

05 / PRACTICE NOTES

Keep verification connected to the file.

Ask RuleX to build the initial authority table from the draft and organize the propositions for review. Work through the official source links, amend the draft in the workspace and preserve the completed ledger with the matter.

Use a final comparison pass after edits: every quoted passage has a checked source, every pinpoint locates the proposition, and the factual premise matches the record. The filing attorney owns that review and the submitted work product.