defect-email.emlGarcia to Smith · May 2, 2025, 9:14 AM
defect-report.pdfAttachment to the email
Transfer receipt, April 29, 2026
Not found
Review-meeting notes: not in the named sources
Litigation software for law firms
Practice law.Not paperwork.
BRON reads the record, keeps the calendar, chases the documents and prepares the first draft, each fact tied to its source. The judgment stays where it belongs: with counsel.
Start with one workflow. Keep the tools your firm still needs. How to start
One matter, six steps.
North Harbor is a fictional commercial dispute: two depositions, one disputed deadline, and the request that follows.
01 / The matter
North Harbor · Notice of defect
- Status
- Disputed: was written notice given by May 4, 2025?
- We have
- Garcia, Dep. 118:4–12 · Smith, Dep. 44:12–20
- Missing
- The email that sent the defect report, and the review-meeting notes
- Next
- Elena Rivera asks North Harbor for its own copies
Illustration · fictional matter 
02 / The contradiction
Page 118. Page 44. Not the same story.
North Harbor had until May 4 to give the supplier written notice of the defect. Garcia testified the supplier knew before that date. Smith testified it learned after. BRON sets the two accounts side by side, each tied to its page and line. Better now than at trial.
- Prepared
- BRON · both accounts side by side, each with its page and line
- Decided
- No one yet · notice stays disputed
- Next
- Find the proof neither witness brought
03 / The next move
The follow-up is already drafted.
Garcia recalls meeting notes. Smith relied on correspondence. Neither document was at the depositions. BRON drafts the request for production to the supplier, and Elena first asks North Harbor for its own copies through the client portal.
- Prepared
- BRON · a request for production to the supplier, not served
- Decided
- Elena · ask North Harbor for its own copies first
- Next
- Garcia answers the request on his Mac
- Before
- Correspondence: missing
- Meeting notes: missing
- Now
- defect-email.eml: received, sent May 2, 2025
- Meeting notes: not found
- Still open
- When Smith received or read the email
04 / What came back
The email came back. The notes did not.
The request names Apple Mail and one folder on Garcia's Mac, and he accepts that scope before anything is copied. His May 2 email to Smith, sent two days before the deadline, arrives on the matter with a receipt. The notes were not in those sources.
- Prepared
- BRON for Mac · the May 2 email, with a transfer receipt
- Decided
- Garcia · accepted the scope before anything was copied
- Next
- Alex revises the memo
Collector runs in BRON for Mac. Requests written inside Collector from an evidence gap are in development.
How Collector works
05 / The sign-off
Nothing leaves without counsel.
Version 3 was held for review. Alex's version 4 quotes the May 2 email and still sets out both accounts. Elena reads it with every source a click away, and approves that exact version.
- Prepared
- Alex · version 4, quoting the May 2 email
- Decided
- Elena · approved that exact version
- Next
- A sharper request to the supplier
06 / The proof
Verifiable by the other side.
Request No. 1 now names the May 2 email and asks the supplier for Smith's copy, its delivery records and the meeting notes. Alex reviews it before it is served. Whatever leaves the firm, the recipient can check each file against its manifest, without a BRON account. Trust, but let them verify.
- Prepared
- Alex · Request No. 1, now naming the May 2 email
- Decided
- Elena · approved the memo it follows from
- Next
- Alex's final review, then service
Litigation software for law firms
Practice law.
Not paperwork.
BRON reads the record, keeps the calendar, chases the documents and prepares the first draft, each fact tied to its source. The judgment stays where it belongs: with counsel.
Start with one workflow. Keep the tools your firm still needs. How to start
North Harbor · Notice of defect
- Status
- Disputed: was written notice given by May 4, 2025?
- We have
- Garcia, Dep. 118:4–12 · Smith, Dep. 44:12–20
- Missing
- The email that sent the defect report, and the review-meeting notes
- Next
- Elena Rivera asks North Harbor for its own copies
02 / The contradiction
Page 118. Page 44. Not the same story.
North Harbor had until May 4 to give the supplier written notice of the defect. Garcia testified the supplier knew before that date. Smith testified it learned after. BRON sets the two accounts side by side, each tied to its page and line. Better now than at trial.
- Prepared
- BRON · both accounts side by side, each with its page and line
- Decided
- No one yet · notice stays disputed
- Next
- Find the proof neither witness brought
03 / The next move
The follow-up is already drafted.
Garcia recalls meeting notes. Smith relied on correspondence. Neither document was at the depositions. BRON drafts the request for production to the supplier, and Elena first asks North Harbor for its own copies through the client portal.
- Prepared
- BRON · a request for production to the supplier, not served
- Decided
- Elena · ask North Harbor for its own copies first
- Next
- Garcia answers the request on his Mac
04 / What came back
The email came back. The notes did not.
The request names Apple Mail and one folder on Garcia's Mac, and he accepts that scope before anything is copied. His May 2 email to Smith, sent two days before the deadline, arrives on the matter with a receipt. The notes were not in those sources.
- Prepared
- BRON for Mac · the May 2 email, with a transfer receipt
- Decided
- Garcia · accepted the scope before anything was copied
- Next
- Alex revises the memo
05 / The sign-off
Nothing leaves without counsel.
Version 3 was held for review. Alex's version 4 quotes the May 2 email and still sets out both accounts. Elena reads it with every source a click away, and approves that exact version.
- Prepared
- Alex · version 4, quoting the May 2 email
- Decided
- Elena · approved that exact version
- Next
- A sharper request to the supplier
06 / The proof
Verifiable by the other side.
Request No. 1 now names the May 2 email and asks the supplier for Smith's copy, its delivery records and the meeting notes. Alex reviews it before it is served. Whatever leaves the firm, the recipient can check each file against its manifest, without a BRON account. Trust, but let them verify.
- Prepared
- Alex · Request No. 1, now naming the May 2 email
- Decided
- Elena · approved the memo it follows from
- Next
- Alex's final review, then service
ChambersNorth Harbor
What came back
The request
From Elena Rivera · Client portal
- What
- The email that sent the defect report to the supplier, its attachments, and any notes from the review meetingMay 1–7, 2025
- Scope
- Apple Mail on this Mac · North Harbor documents folder, accepted by Garcia
Collector runs in BRON for Mac. Requests written inside Collector from an evidence gap are in development.
Transfer receipt
Received April 29, 2026 · BRON for Mac
- defect-email.emlGarcia to Smith · May 2, 2025, 9:14 AM
- defect-report.pdfAttachment to the email
- Review-meeting notes: not in the named sources
On the matter, waiting for Elena's review. Not shown in the client portal.
- Still open
- When Smith received or read the email
ChambersNorth Harbor
Notice memorandum · v4
Garcia testified that the supplier knew of the defect before May 4, 2025. Smith testified that it knew only after that date. On May 2, 2025, Garcia emailed Smith the defect report. The email does not show when Smith received or read it.
- Garcia 118:4
- Smith 44:12
- defect-email.eml
Replaces v3, held for review
Approved by Elena Rivera · April 30, 2026
How the work moves
Each step begins where the last one ended.
Lawyers direct more of the work and spend less of the day holding the process together. Nothing is rebuilt from scratch.
Ask for what is missing
- In BRON
- BRON sends your request to the client, with the reason and the person asking. They answer in the client portal, or from their Mac with BRON for Mac, which copies only the sources the request names, and nothing until they accept.
- You decide
- What to ask for, and who to ask.
BRON for MacNorth Harbor · Notice of defectInspect Elena’s request
Collection
Scope acceptedWhat the request named, and what came back.
Sources and accepted scope
Sources the request names
- Apple Mail on this Mac
- North Harbor documents folder
Elena's request names Apple Mail and one folder. Nothing else on the Mac is read.
Next
On the matter, waiting for Elena's review. Not shown in the client portal.
Copies run in the background until he pauses them. Each transfer gets a receipt.
BRON for Mac after the April 29, 2026 transfer.Illustration · fictional matter A request on the client's Mac, with the scope they accept before anything is copied. See where it fits
- In BRON
- Facts keep the passage they came from. Supporting and contrary accounts sit side by side, each with its source.
- You decide
- What to make of it where the accounts disagree.
The work, connectedRivera LawERChambers · North HarborSource comparisonCompare the accounts of notice. What should the memorandum say?BRON From the matter recordThe timing is disputed.
Garcia describes telling Smith before May 4. Smith says he learned of the defect afterward. The draft should keep both accounts.
Garcia deposition118:4–12“I told Smith about the defect before May 4.”
Smith deposition44:12–20“The first time I heard about that defect was after May 4.”
The original correspondence is the next material to request.
DocumentsNotice memorandum · v3Rivera LawAttorney work productNorth Harbor / Notice memorandum · v3
Notice of the defect
The timing of notice remains disputed. Garcia testified that he told Smith of the defect before May 4, 2025.1 Smith testified that he first learned of the defect after that date.2
The accounts do not establish receipt. The original correspondence and any acknowledgment should be reviewed before adopting a factual position.
For counsel’s reviewBoth accounts are kept, each with its page and line. Counsel decides the factual question.
1Garcia deposition · Apr 22, 2026 · 118:4–12
2Smith deposition · Apr 24, 2026 · 44:12–20
North Harbor01Two accounts of one deadline, each a click from its page and line. Prepare the work
- In BRON
- Drafts, requests and assignments start from the matter's own sources and open questions, and a draft records which facts it relied on.
- You decide
- Whether a plan runs. Nothing starts until a licensed attorney approves it.
The work, connectedRivera LawERChambers · North HarborNew material receivedThe original email is here. What changes in the memorandum?BRON From the matter recordThe email arrived. Notice is still disputed.
Garcia emailed Smith the defect report on May 2. The email does not show when Smith received or read it, so both accounts still stand.
defect-email.emlReceivedGarcia → Smith · May 2, 2025, 9:14 AM
Garcia deposition118:4–12“I told Smith about the defect before May 4.”
Smith deposition44:12–20“The first time I heard about that defect was after May 4.”
Review-meeting notes: not in the named sources
DocumentsNotice memorandum · v4Rivera LawAttorney work productNorth Harbor / Notice memorandum · v4
Notice of the defect
The timing of notice remains disputed. Garcia testified that he told Smith of the defect before May 4, 2025.1 Smith testified that he first learned of the defect after that date.2
Garcia emailed Smith the defect report on May 2, 2025.3 The email does not show when Smith received or read it.
Prepared by Alex Chen · with Elena for reviewProposed request: Smith's copy of the May 2 email, its delivery records, and the review-meeting notes.
1Garcia deposition · Apr 22, 2026 · 118:4–12
2Smith deposition · Apr 24, 2026 · 44:12–20
3defect-email.eml · May 2, 2025, 9:14 AM
North Harbor01A new version that quotes what came back and keeps both accounts, prepared for review. Bring the decision to counsel
- In BRON
- The draft, the passages behind it and the decision you are asked to make, on one screen. Before a document goes out, BRON checks each citation and holds the document if one cannot be confirmed.
- You decide
- Whether it goes. Nothing is sent, signed or filed until someone with authority approves that exact version.
Carry it forward
- In BRON
- Decisions your team records on a matter, with the reasons, carry into later drafts and answers. When a document gets a new version, BRON flags the pending approvals, client updates and research memos that relied on the old one.
- You decide
- What changes because of it. BRON flags the work. It does not rewrite it.
The check runs daily, and it can only flag work that recorded which sources it used. A finished draft is flagged when a fact it cites is corrected, not when a document it cites gets a new version.What that covers
The screens above are one fictional matter, North Harbor, in one workspace.
Follow it from start to finishAcross your matters
Monday, 8 a.m. Already briefed.
Your Day sorts the open work on every matter by what it needs from you: what has a clock running, and what needs your judgment. Each row says what to do, and on which matter. It lists recorded work only, and if part of the list cannot be read, it says so.
How Your Day worksYour DayElena Rivera
Illustration · fictional matters
On the clock1
- Send the hold reminderHold notice unacknowledged by Ines Calloway for 9 daysLitigation hold · Wrenfield Ceramics
For your judgment4
- ReviewNotice memorandum v4Document review · North Harbor · requested by Alex Chen
- Review requestClient documents ready for attorney reviewClient request · North Harbor
- Record service factsClient reports being servedBrasswick Cooperage · the client's account, not a confirmed service date
- Review answersClient answered discovery: Interrogatories, set oneWrenfield Ceramics · a client's draft is never served as written
The people around the matter
One matter. Each person sees their part.
Your team prepares and reviews the work. Your client gets a clear request, a reason for it and a way to respond, and never sees the work product.
- AssociateAlex Chen
- The sources, the open questions and the draft he is preparing.
- Supervising attorneyElena Rivera
- The exact version awaiting her decision, with every source behind it.
- North Harbor operationsGarcia
- What his lawyers need, why it matters, and a receipt for what he sent.
Client workspace
North HarborNH
Your workspace
Welcome back.
Your response is with your legal team.
Response receivedNorth Harbor
ERElena Rivera Your attorney
The original defect email
Please provide the original email discussing the defect, including its recipients and attachments.
Why this helps
Your team is comparing what was sent, when, and to whom.
View the transfer receipt
With Elena for reviewdefect-email.emldefect-report.pdfReceived April 29, 2026 · awaiting review
Only the material your firm shares with you.
Illustration · fictional matterClients see only material their attorney shares. The memorandum and privileged work stay with the legal team.
How the client portal worksFrom the first inquiry to the final invoice.
Every stage has its own page, and each one says what is available today.
From intake to the record6 stages
Intake
An inquiry becomes a matter, without retyping.
AvailableEvidence and discovery
What arrived, what is missing, what to ask for next.
AvailableDrafting and workflows
Drafts and assignments that keep their sources.
AvailableDeadlines
Every date shows its rule and its trigger.
Limited availabilityCovers the courts and rules listed in the documentation.
Trial
The examination, prepared from the record you already built.
Limited availabilityThree working views. Other trial tools are in development.
The record
Exports a recipient can check without an account.
Available
Across the matter9 capabilities
Across the matter
- Valuation
A range, and the assumptions that move it.
Limited availability - Resolution and money
Bills, trust records and closing statements, tied to the work.
Limited availability - Workflows
An assignment, carried from plan to approval.
Available - Chambers
Ask about the case. Open the work behind the answer.
Available - Your Day
What needs you today, across your matters.
Available - Client portal
Requests a client can understand and answer.
Limited availability - Collector
Evidence from a client's Mac, with their consent.
Limited availability - Apps and integrations
Your own AI tools, with access you scope, and the apps a firm can install.
Limited availability - Firm controls
Who can see, draft, approve and act.
Available
Some lines it will not cross.
What BRON checks for you, and what waits for a person.
Every sentence, back to its source.
Click a sentence in a draft to open the passage it cites, wherever BRON can locate it. Whether it supports the sentence is still yours to judge.
An unconfirmed authority holds the document.
If a cited authority cannot be confirmed, the document is held when someone tries to send, sign, file, export or share it. Only a licensed attorney at the firm can release it, and the release is recorded with their reason. If the check cannot run at all, nothing is released.
Approval of the exact act.
Nothing is sent, signed or filed, no trust money moves, and no matter changes phase until someone on the matter approves that exact action. Phase changes, deadlines and sharing documents with a client need a licensed attorney.
Clients see what you share.
Clients see only documents an attorney has reviewed and shared. Privileged and work-product material never reaches the client portal.
A record of who decided.
Approvals and other key acts are added to the matter's log, which can be checked for tampering.
What is live, and what is not.
Every feature page says what is available, what is limited and what is in development.
Begin where the chasing is.
Choose work your team does every month and wishes took less chasing: documents from a client, depositions into a memorandum, a round of discovery. If BRON fits it, we agree scope, setup and terms before any real client material goes in.
After that, the matter lives in BRON. The next request, memorandum or round of discovery starts from what the last one left: the documents received, the facts they support, the decisions already recorded.
- Name the workflow.
- See it on a fictional matter.
- Agree what BRON handles, what stays in your current tools, and who sets up what.
- Agree terms. Begin.
Remember practicing law?
The analysis. The argument. The hour to get it right. Bring us your hardest matter, and we will show you what BRON finds, what it prepares and what it leaves for you to decide.
We walk through it on a fictional matter. Please do not send confidential case information through the form.