Request intake
Capture the purpose, parties, deadline, documents, risk and decision needed before work starts.
Legal AI for US in-house teams
Handle more requests.
Keep Legal in control.
Gotham helps US in-house legal teams take in requests, review NDAs, MSAs and vendor contracts against their playbook, research federal and state law and keep every contract, policy and deadline in one place. Only the exceptions go to a lawyer.
Primary valueCapacity, faster turnaround and less outside counsel spend
Control pointLegal owns the judgment and the escalation
Data locationStored in the United States
The buying problem
In-house work rarely arrives as a clean question. Requests come by email, chat and meetings, with missing context, short deadlines and unclear approvers. Automating only the answer can make the bottleneck worse if intake, handoffs and decision owners stay unclear.
A useful business case follows the whole path: the request, triage, the legal work, lawyer review, the business decision, approval and the record you keep. Value can show up as faster service, more requests handled, less outside counsel spend or fewer exceptions, not only lower headcount.
Where Gotham can enter the work
Contract review
Review NDAs, MSAs and vendor contracts against your playbook, flag deviations and send only the exceptions to a lawyer.
Legal research
Research federal and state case law, the U.S. Code and federal regulations, with every answer cited.
Disputes and chronologies
Organise the record and build a chronology with each event linked to its source.
Workflows
Build a workflow once, then run it the same way every time, with an approval at each step that matters.
Access control
Give each person a role, keep matters separate and decide who can see, edit or share each one.
What to require in evaluation
End-to-end fit
Test the path from a business request to a reviewed answer and an owned next step.
Playbook control
Check that approved positions, fallbacks and escalation rules can be set up and changed safely.
Business self-service
Check whether non-lawyers can give context and get approved outputs without going around Legal.
Systems of record
Decide which system holds contracts, matters, documents, identity and approvals.
Data controls
Check data location, retention, model providers, subprocessors, permissions, logs and whether data trains models.
Real savings
Measure internal capacity, turnaround, avoided outside counsel spend and fewer exceptions separately.
Align the buying committee before the pilot
Questions to resolve
- Which legal leader owns the workflow and where lawyer review is required?
- Which business team supplies the inputs and acts on the answer?
- Which security, privacy, procurement and IT approvals are needed?
- Which system stays the record for documents, contracts and approvals?
Rollout controls
- Publish which uses are allowed, restricted or not allowed.
- Train users on checking output, escalating and handling confidential data.
- Keep business self-service inside approved templates and limits.
- Review adoption, exceptions, quality and value before adding workflows.
Good first pilot candidates
A useful pilot has bounded inputs, a known reviewer and an output whose quality can be scored. Consider:
- Review a recurring vendor or customer agreement against your playbook.
- Answer a bounded regulatory question from a defined set of sources.
- Build an issues list or chronology from a closed dispute record.
Start with the workflow, not the licence count.
Use a private assessment to choose the first test and its success measures.