How it works
You direct. The software drafts. You sign.
That order matters, and it is not a formality. It is the difference between a tool you operate and a representative acting for you — and only one of those things is what we sell.
Inference Legal is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. Our products are not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. We do not review your answers for legal sufficiency, draw legal conclusions, or apply the law to the facts of your particular situation.
The six steps
-
You choose the court, the claim, and the form
You tell the software where you are filing and what you are filing. It shows you the official forms your court publishes — for federal civil cases, the fifteen Pro Se forms the Administrative Office maintains[1] — along with the general instructions that accompany them.
The software does not pick your claim. Choosing what to file is a legal decision, and it is yours.
-
You supply the facts
You enter what happened, in your own words: who did what, when, where, and what it cost you. The software organizes what you give it. It does not supply facts you did not give it, and it does not decide which of your facts are legally significant.
-
The software researches, and shows its work
It searches published opinions, statutes, and the rules of procedure for your court, and returns what it finds with the citation attached. Every authority is a link to the public record.
General legal information, not advice about your situation. If the research surfaces something that looks decisive to you, that is a signal to read the source — or to consult a licensed attorney.
-
The document is completed at your direction
The software assembles your facts into the structure the rules require: a caption, numbered paragraphs each limited to a single set of circumstances, a demand for relief, and a signature block.[2]
Structure is not the same as sufficiency. Since 2007 a complaint must state a claim that is "plausible on its face" to survive a motion to dismiss.[3] Whether yours does is a legal judgment we do not make for you.
-
You verify every citation
Before anything is filed, you check the authorities against the public record. The software links each one so this takes seconds rather than an afternoon. This step is not optional — see the research engine for why we are blunt about it.
-
You review, sign, and file
You read the document. You correct it. You sign it. Under Rule 11(a) an unrepresented party signs personally, and by signing you certify to the court that your legal contentions are warranted and your factual contentions have evidentiary support.[4]
Then you file it, and the deadlines start. The software tracks them and shows you the rule behind each one.
What we do not do
Stated as plainly as what we do, because the line matters more than the marketing.
We do not choose your claim
Which cause of action fits your facts, which defense to raise, which forum to pick, whether to sue at all — these are legal judgments. We do not make them for you and we do not recommend among them.
We do not check legal sufficiency
We do not review your answers for legal sufficiency and we do not tell you your filing will succeed. No document our software completes is warranted to be valid, sufficient, or accepted by any court.
We do not represent you
We employ no attorneys. No attorney–client relationship is created. Your communications with us are not protected by the attorney–client privilege. You represent yourself.
If what you need is someone to make these judgments for you, what you need is a lawyer — and you should get one. Many courts maintain self-help centers and lawyer referral services, and legal aid may be available depending on your income and your matter.
Sources
- Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Civil Pro Se Forms, effective December 1, 2016. Forms index.
- Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Rule 10.
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007) (a complaint needs "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face"); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 684 (2009) (the standard applies to "all civil actions"). Courts construe filings by self-represented parties liberally — Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) — but liberal construction is not an exemption from the plausibility standard. Twombly · Iqbal · Erickson.
- Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a), (b). Rule 11.