Stop Answering the Same Legal Question 11 Times a Year

Most legal knowledge isn't missing — it's sitting in someone's sent folder from eighteen months ago. This short unpacks a real example: a legal ops team that answered the same supplier question eleven times in one year, with eleven slightly different answers. The point isn't the wasted hours — it's the inconsistency those answers created. - Repetition is a symptom; inconsistent answers are the actual risk - AI's role here isn't generating new legal reasoning — it's making existing reasoning findable and repeatable - Every answer should come with its source attached, so people can check where it came from A quick self-audit: count how many questions your team is answering for the second (or fifth) time this week. If that number bothers you, take a look at LEGALDIGM or book a demo.