Industries · Legal

Claude, configured for the way law firms actually work.

Law firms see the AI opportunity. The slow part has been the gap between Claude as a general-purpose assistant and the specific workflows of legal practice. We close that gap. Document review, intake, client communications, matter management, and drafting, configured around how the firm actually works.

Book a call See workflows

The problem

The hours go to the same places, every year.

Every firm we talk to runs into the same handful of patterns. Different practice areas, same shape: deadline-driven document work that scales by adding hours, not by getting smarter.

Intake

New matters arrive in inconsistent formats. Pulling out the key facts, conflicts, and next actions burns associate or paralegal time before billable work even starts.

Document review

First-pass review of contracts, productions, and discovery material eats hours that should be spent on judgment calls, not page-turning.

Client communications

Status updates, letters, and standard correspondence get drafted from scratch each time, even when the shape is identical from one matter to the next.

Matter management

Pulling together where a matter stands, who has done what, and what is due next pulls people away from the work itself.

Drafting

Initial drafts of standard documents and the routine bookends of larger filings take hours that the underlying judgment does not require.

Research summaries

Distilling case law and prior memos into something usable for the matter at hand is repeat work the team rarely gets credit for.

What we build

Concrete workflows, built around your practice.

We start with the work the firm is already doing, calibrated to the firm's voice, taxonomy, and review standards. The workflows below are the ones that show up in a typical week.

Intake summarizer

Inbound matter information turns into a structured matter record: parties, facts, dates, conflicts flag, suggested next actions. The reviewer signs off on the record instead of building it from scratch.

First-pass document review

A calibrated review assistant flags the clauses, terms, or issues the firm cares about in a given matter type. The lawyer reviews the flags, not the whole document.

Correspondence drafter

Standard letters, status updates, and routine outbound communications drafted in the firm's voice, against the firm's templates, ready for partner or associate review.

Matter status briefing

A short brief on where the matter stands, what has been done, and what is due next, generated from the team's existing notes and files. Useful for status calls, partner check-ins, and handoffs.

Research summarizer

Case law and prior memos summarized against the question at hand, with citations the lawyer can verify before relying on them. The lawyer's review stays load-bearing; the first pass does not.

Proof

Why us, specifically

Legal taxonomy on the team, and one completed engagement behind us.

Shannon Advisory's legal work is led by Ryan Kashtan, a partner who practiced as an attorney at Davis Polk & Wardwell and holds a JD from Harvard Law School. He knows how legal work actually gets done, and what it costs when it's done by hand.

Behind that, one completed engagement in legal services: a deadline-driven, document-heavy operation in the adjacent ecosystem to a law firm. The detailed case study publishes once the client approves it.

Shannon Advisory is a member of the Claude Partner Network.

How we work

Start with one workflow.

For most firms, the right first step is Build: one high-leverage workflow, turned into a working system the firm owns, on a fixed timeline.

Recommended entry point

Build

One specific problem, turned into a working system. We build it, test it against your real work, and hand it over running. Pricing by proposal.

See the Build page

Not sure where to start? Adopt is built for that: team training, a workflow audit, and an opportunity map that surface the workflow worth building first.

FAQ

Questions firms ask before the first call.

We're a small or midsize firm. Is a Claude implementation right for us?

Yes. This page is for the small or midsize firm: the practice running intake, review, drafting, and matter management with a partner-led team. We configure Claude for the way the firm already runs that work and get the team using it. The larger institutional legal-AI products serve a different scale of firm; this is built for what a smaller practice actually does in a week.

What about client confidentiality and data handling?

Confidentiality is the first decision in any legal engagement. We map data flow before we write a prompt: where matter information lives, who can see what, what stays inside the firm. Different deployment options carry different posture; we walk through them and pick the one that matches the firm's obligations.

How long does a Claude implementation take for a law firm?

A Build engagement runs four to six weeks from kickoff to handoff. That is enough to design, build, test against real matter examples, document, and train the team. Larger or more integrated implementations take longer; we recommend starting with one workflow.

Do we need IT involvement?

Lightly, usually. For a workflow that lives inside a Claude account and operates on documents your team brings to it, IT involvement is minimal. For workflows that integrate with the firm's document management or matter management system, IT or the vendor needs to be in the loop. We scope that during discovery so there are no surprises.

What if the firm has already tried AI and it did not stick?

Most firms have. The reason it did not stick is almost always the same: someone tried a generic tool on a generic prompt, got a generic result, and stopped. The work is in the configuration and the workflow design. We start by finding where the leverage actually is in the practice, then build for that.