Turn the matter record into a chronology.
Preserve the path back to evidence.
Gotham helps litigation teams organize dates, events, participants and documents into a reviewable chronology where each material event remains linked to its supporting source.
The operational problem
Chronology work looks mechanical until the record contains inconsistent dates, duplicate exhibits, retrospective accounts, amendments and events that matter only to a particular issue. A date list without provenance can create false confidence.
The useful unit is therefore not just an event. It is an event with a stated date basis, participants, issue tags, source location, confidence and any conflicting account. Automation can accelerate extraction and organization; the litigation team must decide what the record proves.
A defensible workflow, step by step
Bound the record
Define the document universe, date range, issues, privilege rules and versions included in the exercise.
Normalize documents
Classify files, preserve identifiers and separate duplicates, annexures and later versions.
Extract candidate events
Identify dates, actors, actions and referenced documents without collapsing stated and inferred dates.
Attach provenance
Link each candidate event to page, paragraph or exhibit support and record how the date was derived.
Resolve conflicts
Group competing accounts, duplicates and uncertain sequences for explicit lawyer review.
Build issue views
Filter the verified chronology by issue, witness, document, period or procedural stage for case preparation.
What to evaluate before you buy
Source fidelity
Can every event be traced to the precise document location that supports it?
Date semantics
Does the system distinguish event dates, document dates, filing dates and dates mentioned retrospectively?
Conflict handling
Are inconsistent accounts preserved for review instead of silently merged?
Version control
Can the team identify duplicates, amendments and the authoritative version of a record?
Privilege and access
Do permissions, exports and logs respect matter confidentiality and review roles?
Usable export
Can the chronology move into witness, pleading and hearing preparation without losing citations?
Where lawyer judgment remains essential
Gotham is a work product and decision-support system—not a substitute for professional judgment. Outputs should be reviewed by a qualified professional with the relevant matter context.
- Whether a document proves that an event occurred or merely records an allegation.
- How conflicts, gaps and retrospective statements affect the sequence.
- Which events are material to each pleaded issue or legal test.
- Privilege, admissibility and the proper use of confidential material.
- The theory of the case and any work product used in advice, pleadings or hearings.
Prove it in a bounded two-week pilot
Use representative work, a fixed baseline and named reviewers. The objective is not a polished demonstration; it is evidence about whether the workflow improves real work safely.
Design the pilot →Pilot scope
- A representative, bounded matter set with known complexity.
- A chronology or issue list previously reviewed by the team, if available.
- Agreed rules for dates, duplicates, conflicts and source citation.
Measure
- Material-event coverage and unsupported additions.
- Accuracy of source locations, dates and participant attribution.
- Lawyer correction time and utility across issue views.