The method
The anatomy of a case, in seven stations.
From qualification to signature. For each station: what happens elsewhere, what happens here, and the proof that it was done.
01 — Qualification and exhaustive search for grounds
You cannot choose between grounds you never had time to find.
Elsewhere
Three or four grounds are kept, the ones the partner knows best. Research stops when the hour budget stops. The public-policy ground raised by the court becomes a surprise.
Here
Systematic sweep of every available ground: contractual, tortious, quasi-contractual, procedural, limitation, nullity, jurisdiction, public policy. Each is qualified, given a historical success rate, then kept or set aside by a reasoned decision.
The proof
Qualification note filed with the case: 11 grounds examined, 5 retained, 6 set aside with reasons. Available to the client.
02 — Building the evidence and the ground × exhibit matrix
The evidentiary gap is found before proceedings are issued.
Elsewhere
The exhibit list is built at the end, from whatever the client sent. At the hearing, you discover a claim was supported by nothing.
Here
A timestamped chronology generated from the exhibits, with contradictions flagged. Then the matrix: every claim in a row, every exhibit in a column, every intersection qualified as direct evidence, indication or contradiction. What is unsupported shows in red.
Moyens dépourvus de preuve directe : M-06 — Enrichissement injustifié ; M-11 — Fin de non-recevoir — défaut de qualité.
The proof
Dated matrix, versioned each time exhibits are filed. The two unsupported grounds in case 2024-1187 were dropped before filing.
03 — Drafting and citation verification
Submissions are not filed with an unverified citation.
Elsewhere
The authority is copied from an earlier set. Nobody checks whether it has since been overruled. Successive submissions contradict each other across eighty pages.
Here
Existence, exact scope, subsequent history and reversal checked for every authority. Consistency checks between sets of submissions, between submissions and exhibits, between the exhibit list and cross-references. Recapitulation of claims and grounds compliant with article 768 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The proof
Server-side lock: “ready to file” is refused as long as a citation is marked overruled, not found or misquoted. The audit trail travels with the deliverable.
04 — Red team — the case attacked by itself
The contradiction arrives before the opponent’s.
Elsewhere
You discover the other side’s arguments by reading their submissions, and you answer under the pressure of the case-management timetable.
Here
Every draft is systematically attacked from the opponent’s point of view. Each weakness gets a severity from 1 to 5, then a rebuttal written into the text itself. The study of the opponent covers their published submissions and recurring grounds.
The proof
Objection register: raised, severity, rebuttal, location in the submissions. No objection of severity 4 or 5 left open at filing.
05 — Jurimetrics and a realistic range
An excessive claim discredits the rest of the case.
Elsewhere
The quantum is set by intuition, usually high to leave negotiating room. The real length of the proceedings is never announced.
Here
Historical success rate of the ground before the court seised, quantum actually awarded by quartile, observed duration. The intended claim is positioned against that range before it is settled.
Stated limit
No analysis of a named judge. In France, reusing the identity data of judges and court clerks to evaluate or predict their practices is a criminal offence (article 33 of Law no. 2019-222 of 23 March 2019). We analyse decisions, grounds and courts. Never people.
The proof
Jurimetrics sheet filed with the case: scope, sample size, sources, generation date. 412 decisions for case 2024-1187.
06 — Decision tree — settle or continue
The client decides with full knowledge, at every node.
Elsewhere
Settlement is raised once, late, often the day before the hearing. The opportunity cost of continuing is never made visible.
Here
Settlement, interim relief, merits, appeal, enforcement: each branch carries its cost, its duration and its expected value, recomputed at every event in the case. Procedural strategy follows — timetable, useful applications, tipping points, limitation.
The proof
Dated tree attached to every decision note. The history of recalculations is kept: the client sees what changed and why.
07 — Human review, signature, audit trail
The lawyer signs. The assistance signs nothing.
Elsewhere
The use of assisted tools is neither declared nor documented. The client does not know which part of the work was produced how, nor who reviewed it.
Here
Human review of 100 % of deliverables, with professional indemnity engaged on each. Full log: which task, which model, which sources, which reviewer, at what time. Case-by-case partitioning, no training on client data.
The proof
Audit trail open to the client, exportable, kept for the limitation period of the firm’s liability.
The gain is uneven, and we say so: massive on research, contract review and document analysis; slight or nil on advocacy, negotiation and the hearing.
Architecture, governance and limits →