Litigation: 200 exhibits and a draft that keeps changing

In a substantial dispute, documents arrive in batches. Some have poor filenames; others look alike. A date is missing or a new version replaces an earlier one. Building a chronology takes work. Keeping the draft, exhibit numbers and schedule consistent afterwards takes more.

Compare the whole workflow

Prepare a test matter with around 200 exhibits, including duplicates, an undated document and one received late. Ask each tool to find the right passage, build a chronology you can check, cite exhibits in Word and produce a readable schedule. Record what still needs manual checking.

Then change the draft: move a citation, add an exhibit and rename it. Can the existing schedule be updated? Do the numbers still agree in the text, the schedule and the files to be served? Can you lock the order when procedure requires it? This second pass tells you more than the initial generation.

Test Jimini on your own matter

Jimini’s litigation workspace brings matter documents together for renaming, analysis and preparation of a statement of facts. In Word, citations, numbering and the exhibit schedule are linked; Jimini says the schedule updates when citations change. Test that behaviour with your drafting format and service requirements. The work with Lussan on high-volume litigation explains the origin of this workflow, but does not replace a trial.

Measure the time to a checked set of exhibits, rather than the first summary. Counsel still decides which documents matter, what argument to make and which version to serve.