Docket

For solo & small law firms

Docket is the safe AI layer for your solo or small firm.

You bill 2.4 hours of an 8-hour day. The rest leaks into intake calls, status emails, time reconstruction, and document drudgery you can't invoice. Docket maps how your practice runs, finds the safe AI wins, and builds them with your team — confidentiality scoped first, you approve everything before it touches a client. Done with you, from $499/mo.

8 min read

See pricing

The shift

72% of solo and 67% of small-firm legal pros already report using AI in some capacity — but only 8% of solos and 4% of small firms have operationalized it, and more than four in five expect their use to grow this year. The gap between dabbling and deployed is the whole game. Meanwhile 43% of firms have no AI policy, so client facts are getting pasted into consumer chatbots with zero guardrails.

Your reality

You are the lawyer, the rainmaker, the intake screener, the billing clerk, and the office manager. Benchmarks put utilization at 38% — about 3.0 billable hours captured per 8-hour day, 2.4 collected as cash. 77% of small firms say they spend too much time on admin. You're not under-working; you're under-billing — and you can't invoice the intake, follow-up, or admin eating the day.

2.4 hrs

of an 8-hour day actually collected as cash

38%

average lawyer utilization rate

~56%

of firm calls go unanswered

From $499/mo

done with you, no long-term contract

Built to fit the systems your firm already runs on

ClioMyCaseSmokeballPracticePantherLawPayFilevine

Sound familiar?

"Over half my calls go unanswered — and every missed one was probably a retainer."
"I didn't go to law school to do data entry."
"Any update on my case?" — an hour a day of status calls and emails I can never bill.
"I'm busy all day and still can't hit my billables — nine hours worked, three invoiced."
"I know I should use AI. I just don't know where to start, or whether it's safe."
"If I get an AI citation wrong, it lands in front of a judge."

Where AI fits

Never watch a prospect dial the next firm.

Only about 44% of firms answer the phone, and leads reached within five minutes convert far more often than those reached after thirty. An AI intake assistant answers 24/7, captures the facts, runs a first-pass conflict screen, and books the consult.

The assistant gathers and structures the matter facts, runs an initial conflict check, and puts a consult on your calendar. It gives no legal advice.

Calls answered around the clock
Faster first contact
Fewer leads through the cracks

Watch for: You approve every booked matter before the engagement letter goes out · It screens and schedules — it never advises (the UPL line) · Sensitive matters route to a human

Best for: Solos and 2–5 lawyer firms with no receptionist, and any firm bleeding after-hours and overflow calls.

Stop re-keying the same client three times.

Police reports, IDs, prior filings, intake forms — AI extracts and classifies the fields and pre-populates the matter, turning manual keying into exception review.

Uploaded documents are read, fields extracted and mapped into your practice-management system, so staff confirm rather than type.

One clean entry, not three
Fewer transcription errors
Paralegal hours back

Watch for: Your paralegal verifies every extracted field before the matter opens · Extraction is a draft, not a decision · Sensitive identifiers stay access-controlled

Best for: High-intake practices — PI, immigration, bankruptcy — drowning in re-entry across CRM, practice management, and billing.

Find the one fact buried in 6,000 pages — then verify it yourself.

AI surfaces candidate passages in minutes instead of hours, each pointing back to the exact source page. Tool vendors report large speedups; we treat those as what's possible, not a promise.

AI reads the production, surfaces candidate passages with a pointer to the source page, and ranks them by relevance.

Hours of review compressed
More key facts surfaced
Every passage cited to source

Watch for: An attorney reads and verifies every cited passage before relying on it · Treat the output as leads to check, not findings · The explicit antidote to the sanction wave

Best for: Litigation and PI firms facing large document productions with no litigation-support team.

Turn a template and a stack of notes into a first draft you redline.

AI assembles the first version from your firm's own templates plus the matter facts — wills, demand letters, contracts, intake summaries.

Your templates and the matter record feed a drafting step that produces an editable first version in your firm's voice.

First drafts in minutes
Your templates, your language
More time for the actual lawyering

Watch for: The attorney redlines and signs off · AI never produces a final client deliverable unreviewed · Drafts stay internal until approved

Best for: Flat-fee and document-heavy practices — estate planning, transactional — where drafting speed is margin.

"Find that clause we used last time" — with a citation you can open.

Grounded search across your own matters, briefs, and templates that always points to the source — plus a research assistant that returns verifiable citations instead of inventing them.

Search runs over your firm's own data and source-grounded materials, and every answer carries a citation to where it came from.

Precedent found in seconds
Citations you can verify
No more "I know we drafted this before"

Watch for: The lawyer confirms the cited source before reuse or filing · Grounded, cited retrieval keeps this out of hallucination territory · If an error could reach a judge, a human checks it first

Best for: Every firm currently tempted to paste questions into a consumer chatbot.

Score the leads worth your time; stop the no-shows eating your calendar.

AI scores inbound inquiries by matter type and value, auto-sends consult confirmations and reminders, and re-engages stale prospects.

Leads are scored against criteria you set, and confirmations, reminders, and re-engagement sequences fire automatically.

Fewer no-shows
Warm leads worked, not forgotten
Your attention on the matters that pay

Watch for: You set the qualification criteria · You approve any fee or retainer quote before it's sent (Rule 1.5) · Re-engagement honors opt-outs

Best for: Consult-driven practices losing a quarter to a third of scheduled meetings to no-shows.

Onboard a new matter without a step slipping.

A multi-step intake workflow — conflict check, engagement letter, trust-deposit request, docketing — where AI handles the routing and drafting and stops at each human gate.

The workflow moves a new matter through its steps, drafting documents and queuing actions, pausing for sign-off where it matters.

Nothing slips between systems
Consistent onboarding
Deadlines and trust steps caught

Watch for: Human sign-off at the conflict-clearance gate and before any trust action · AI stays read-only on IOLTA balances · Disbarment-level stakes mean no auto-execution

Best for: Growing small firms where the onboarding checklist keeps slipping as volume rises.

Safe to start vs. proceed with guardrails

Safe to start now

After-hours intake that gathers facts and books consults — no advice given.
Extracting fields from intake documents into your matter record, with staff verification.
First-draft demand letters, wills, and contracts from your own templates, attorney redlined.
Grounded search across your firm's matters and templates, returning a citation to the source.
Consult confirmations, reminders, and stale-lead re-engagement on criteria you set.
On-voice blog and FAQ content drafted for your review.

Proceed with guardrails

Anything client-facing that could read as legal advice — the UPL line; a lawyer reviews before it sends.
Legal research and citations used in filings — a mandatory attorney cite-check; 47 states now have formal AI ethics guidance, and ABA Opinion 512 keeps you fully responsible for AI work product.
Discovery passages relied on as fact — verify against the source before use.
Anything touching the IOLTA trust account — AI stays read-only; a human approves every trust action, since mismanagement can mean disbarment.
Conflict-of-interest clearance — AI can assemble the check; a lawyer confirms it before engagement.
Confidential or privileged data — scoped first, on tools that don't train on your inputs, with architecture you approve before go-live.

Why do it with us

Hire a legal-tech consultant	High hourly, long discovery	You pay for months of discovery before anything ships
Hire an ops person	A full salary you may not afford	No AI context, no governance know-how
DIY shadow AI (the chatbot after 6pm)	"Free"	Privilege leaks and sanctions — 43% of firms have no AI policy, and fabricated-citation cases keep climbing
systemlevel.ai	From $499/mo	Done with you, confidentiality scoped first, you approve everything

The structural case is independent: 38% utilization, roughly half the day non-billable, about 56% of calls unanswered, and around 14% average lead conversion. The leak is real no matter who sells the fix.
Firms with wide AI adoption are about 3x more likely to report revenue growth than non-adopters (Clio, vendor-reported).
Lawyers using generative AI report saving up to 260 hours a year (Clio, vendor-reported).
Tech-enabled solos report 53% higher revenue — 28% for small firms — when they pair e-signature, online scheduling, online intake, and texting, with a 48% lift in leads (Clio).
Review tools report large speedups on document review and key-fact discovery; we frame those vendor figures as what's possible, not promised.

Questions you’re probably asking

I can't put client data into an AI — confidentiality and privilege.: You're right to lead with it; it's the number-one adoption barrier. Docket scopes every workflow with confidentiality first — tools that don't train on your inputs, data-handling reviewed before go-live, and a map of exactly what data touches what system. You approve the architecture before it touches a single client.
AI hallucinates and lawyers are getting sanctioned.: That's exactly why Docket is built human-in-the-loop. Hundreds of fabricated-citation cases have drawn fines and bar referrals — and every one of those lawyers had no checkpoint. Docket drafts and retrieves with citations to source, and a lawyer verifies before anything is filed or sent. The checkpoint is the product.
I don't have time to learn another tool — and I don't know where to start.: Docket is done with you, not handed to you. We map your firm, pick one workflow (usually intake or drafting), and build it with your team, so your learning curve stays near zero. ABA Opinion 512 says you can't bill clients for learning a general AI tool anyway, so keeping that curve flat is the point.
Faster work means fewer billable hours — won't AI cannibalize my revenue?: You're only collecting 2.4 hours of an 8-hour day. Reclaiming the non-billable admin lets you take more matters — or shift to flat fee, where speed is margin (75% of solos already use flat fees). Wide adopters are about 3x more likely to grow revenue.
My clients won't trust a lawyer who uses AI.: Only 36% of clients say they'd be less likely to trust an AI-using lawyer, and a plurality would be more comfortable if it made you more responsive (47%) or more affordable (44%). They never see the AI — they see a faster callback and a lawyer who answers.
It's another monthly bill.: From $499/mo against a documented $50k–$100k a year intake leak and roughly 5.6 unbilled hours a day. There's a 14-day trial, no long-term contract, and you can pause or cancel anytime.

Pricing

Operator — $499/mo

A monthly strategy session, your first workflows mapped and scoped (usually intake or drafting), vendor and model recommendations, a read on your current stack, and email support.

Best for: A solo who wants one thing fixed — safely — before adding more.

Partner — $999/mo

Everything in Operator, plus bi-weekly working sessions, implementation guidance through deployment, architecture and integration review, team training with prompt libraries, and a direct line for unblocking.

Best for: The 2–10 lawyer firm operationalizing AI across intake, drafting, and research with the governance to match.