May 12, 2026. Both versions are kept, so you can compare them.
Matter intelligence
Every fact, and what rests on it.
Click a sentence to open the passage behind it. Read both accounts side by side. When a document changes, BRON flags the pending work that relied on it.
Availability: Limited availability
A new document version flags pending approvals, client updates and research memos. A finished draft is flagged when a fact it cites is corrected, not when a document it cites changes.
BRONMatter intelligenceNorth Harbor · matter intelligence
Source revisionv1 → v2
SMITH ERRATA · MAY 12, 2026Smith's errata sheet, recorded as transcript version 2 beside version 1For review
What relied on version 1
Inspect the accounts and the flagged work
GARCIA DEP. 118:4–12“Before May 4.”In the record
SMITH DEP. 44:12–20“Only after May 4.”In the record
PENDING APPROVAL · NOTICE ANALYSISRelies on Smith 44:12–20 of version 1. Review the changed source before approving.For review
About this example
In practice
Where it came from, and what changed.
Find the source.
Click a sentence to open the passage it cites: a span of text, or a box on a scanned page. If BRON cannot locate it, it says so.
BRON / Matter record01Deposition excerpt
Garcia’s account.
118:4–12“Before May 4.”
Garcia depositionPage and line recordedThe question it bears on
Was written notice of the defect given by May 4, 2025?
The supplier knew of the defect before May 4. Garcia attended the review meeting. What it establishes is for counsel to decide.North Harbor · Notice of defect · Illustration · fictional matter Read both accounts.
Supporting and contrary accounts sit side by side, each with its source. Which one holds is counsel's call.
BRON / Matter record02Notice / disputed timing
Read both accounts.
Supports notice
“Before May 4.”
Garcia deposition · 118:4–12
Recorded testimonyConflicts with it
“Only after May 4.”
Smith deposition · 44:12–20
Recorded testimonyEach account keeps its witness and page. A link BRON suggests between a fact and an element stays a suggestion until counsel decides.
North Harbor · Notice of defect · Illustration · fictional matter Revisit what changed.
A new document version flags the pending work that relied on it. An accepted correction to a fact flags the work that cited it. Nothing is rewritten.
BRON / Matter record03Source change / affected work
The transcript changed.
One approval is flagged.Smith transcript v1What the proposal relied onSmith transcript v2Errata sheet, May 12, 2026Pending approval · notice analysisFlagged for reviewThe proposed action relied on Smith 44:12–20 of version 1. Read the change before approving.
The daily review flags pending approvals, client updates and research memos that recorded their sources. A new version does not flag finished drafts. The earlier approval of notice memorandum v4 stays on the record.
North Harbor · Notice of defect · Illustration · fictional matter
What this carries into the rest of the matter
- Sources and their exact passages, into drafts and discovery requests.
- Disputed facts, marked as disputed wherever they are used.
- Decisions your team records on a matter, with the reasons, into later drafts and answers on that matter.
- Flags for review, on the daily board, naming the source that changed.
One decision in practice
What relied on the transcript that changed?
The proposed action recorded that it relied on Smith 44:12–20 of version 1.
If BRON cannot read a source, the review is marked blocked. It never reports that nothing changed.
Your next decision
Decide whether the proposed action still has its basis before you approve it.