Cross Matter Search: Ask Every Matter Your Firm Has Ever Handled
Every veteran paralegal gets the question: “Have we seen this IME before?” The answer is in the firm’s files — usually a closed one. Cross Matter Search is the capability the platform is named for: ask once, and it answers from every matter you’re allowed to see, cited to the exact matter and page. Provider and IME histories come back registry-exact — matters, visits, treating versus IME — and conflict-screened matters stay invisible, even in the counts.
- One question, every matter you can access — cited to the source matter and page
- Provider and IME dossiers with registry-exact counts: matters, visits, treating vs. IME
- Ethical walls enforced absolutely — screened matters invisible, even in the counts
Questions your firm couldn’t ask before
Most legal AI answers from one matter at a time. Your firm’s edge lives across matters: which IME physicians you’ve used on lumbar-spine claims and what they concluded; whether anyone at the firm has dealt with Dr. Olson before; which prior matters saw an IME dispute causation on a degenerative-disc theory. Cross Matter Search reads the records of every matter you’re permitted to see and answers in one chat — each fact cited to the matter and page it came from, so verifying it is a click, not an archive dig.
Institutional memory that stays verifiable — and stays inside the walls
When a question names a provider, the answer carries the firm’s dossier on them — how many matters, how many visits, treating or IME — counted from the firm’s provider registry, not estimated from text. Name variants are linked conservatively; a near-match is never merged without a person confirming it. And access follows your firm’s rules: answers draw only on matters the asker can see, and a conflict-screened matter doesn’t appear at all — not in the answer, not in the totals.
Frequently asked questions
- What is Cross Matter Search?
- A firm-level chat that answers questions across every matter your firm has handled — not just the one you have open. Ask about a provider, an IME, an injury pattern, or a prior argument, and the answer comes back grounded in the records of the matters you’re allowed to access, cited to the source matter and page.
- How is this different from asking inside one matter?
- Matter-level chat answers from a single matter’s record. Cross Matter Search answers from your firm’s whole book — “have we used this IME before?” pulls their history across matters, with each fact cited to the matter and page it came from.
- How does it respect ethical walls and access controls?
- Answers draw only on matters the asker is permitted to see. A conflict-screened matter is invisible absolutely — it doesn’t appear in answers, and it isn’t counted in provider totals.
- Can I trust the provider counts?
- Provider and IME totals — matters, visits, treating vs. IME — come from the firm’s provider registry and are exact, not estimated. The narrative parts of an answer cite the record so you can verify them in a click.
- What if two providers have similar names?
- Name variants of the same provider are linked conservatively — an exact identifier or exact-name match links automatically, and anything close-but-uncertain is queued for a person to confirm rather than merged. Your counts never silently blend two doctors.