JustineAI™ — Medical Malpractice Edition.

1. Stage 01Merit screen & intake

   When the edition opens, Justine will conduct structured intake for the prospective med-mal matter — injury mechanism, treating providers, the suspected deviation, and the discovery-rule clock. She is designed to flag whether the facts plausibly state a departure from accepted practice before a single record is ordered.

2. Stage 02Multi-provider record assembly

   Justine will assemble the full record set — hospital, surgeon, anesthesia, nursing, pathology, imaging, billing — ordering, deduplicating, and chronologizing across providers. Designed to read the entire 5,000–50,000-page record in one 10M-token context, she surfaces sequencing, contradictions, and gaps together rather than chunk by chunk.

3. Stage 03Standard-of-care & causation analysis

   Each suspected deviation will be anchored to a cited standard-of-care reference — a medical-society guideline or peer-reviewed paper — and matched to the corresponding act or omission in the record. Justine is designed to separate the breach question from causation, isolating where the injury actually traces to the departure.

4. Stage 04Certificate of merit

   Justine will pre-populate the jurisdiction’s certificate-of-merit or affidavit-of-merit template from the assembled record, citing the specific records and standards in play. The consulting expert reviews and signs; the attorney attests. Designed to meet the statutory pre-suit threshold, not to substitute for the expert’s own judgment.

5. Stage 05Expert retention & reports

   Justine is designed to manage the expert program — engagement letters, retention budgets, scheduling, and a record digest tailored to each specialty. She will draft expert-report scaffolds grounded in the cited literature for the retained expert to revise, refine, and adopt as their own opinion.

6. Stage 06Discovery & depositions

   Justine will draft interrogatories and requests keyed to the documented deviations, then prepare deposition outlines for treating providers and defense experts. Designed to cross-reference each deponent’s prior statements against the record, she builds impeachment sequences from the witness’s own words and writings.

7. Stage 07Daubert challenge prep

   Justine is designed to assemble a Daubert pre-read on each opposing expert — prior testimony, peer-reviewed track record, and methodological gaps measured against the field’s accepted methods. She will surface where an opinion outruns its support, with the supporting authority grounded against CourtListener.

8. Stage 08Trial workup / settlement

   Justine will model the settlement matrix against venue verdict comparables, life-care-plan costs, and lien exposure, and assemble the trial workup — exhibits, demonstratives, and witness order. Designed to present each figure with its evidence and confidence so the attorney decides the number and the posture.

• Records & chronology sub-agent

  Multi-provider record assembly, deduplication, and one-context chronology across hospital, surgical, nursing, anesthesia, pathology, imaging, and billing records — sequencing, contradictions, and treatment gaps surfaced together with the source page behind each.

  For example — On a retained-surgical-item matter, the sub-agent will read 31,000 pages across four facilities in one context and reconstruct the operative timeline: the count discrepancy noted in the circulating nurse’s intraoperative record, the radiology read eleven days later identifying the retained sponge, and the gap where no follow-up count was charted — each anchored to its page, ready for the attorney’s review.

• Standard-of-care sub-agent

  Breach analysis grounded in cited medical literature — society guidelines, practice parameters, peer-reviewed studies — matched to the specific act or omission in the record. Separates the standard-of-care question from causation; never invents the governing standard.

  For example — On a missed-MI matter, the sub-agent will cite the chest-pain evaluation pathway in the applicable cardiology guideline, then point to the discharged patient’s documented troponin order that was never resulted and the ECG never over-read. It will frame the departure against the published standard and leave the breach opinion for the retained cardiologist to adopt and attest.

• Causation sub-agent

  Links the documented deviation to the claimed injury — alternative-cause analysis, pre-existing-condition disentanglement, but-for and substantial-factor reasoning, loss-of-chance framing where the venue recognizes it. Distinguishes breach from harm.

  For example — On a delayed-sepsis-diagnosis matter, the sub-agent will trace the 14-hour window between the first abnormal lactate and the first antibiotic, model the documented organ-function decline across that window, and isolate the harm attributable to the delay from the patient’s underlying comorbidities — surfacing where the causal chain is strong and where defense will press loss-of-chance.

• Expert & Daubert sub-agent

  Expert retention logistics, specialty-matched record digests, draft report scaffolds, and Daubert risk on both sides — opposing experts’ prior testimony, publication record, and methodological gaps, assembled into a challenge pre-read.

  For example — On a birth-injury matter, the sub-agent will compile the defense neonatologist’s prior depositions and publications, flag an opinion in this case that contradicts the expert’s own peer-reviewed paper on cooling-protocol timing, and assemble the methodological gaps into a Daubert outline — every cited opinion grounded against a verifiable authority on CourtListener for the attorney to weigh.

• Multi-provider chronology across 5,000–50,000 pages

  The 10M-token long-context model reads the entire medical record set in one thought — not chunked retrieval. Treatment sequencing, contradictions, and gaps surface together.

• Causation reasoning with cited standard-of-care deviations

  Every causation argument is anchored to a published standard-of-care reference (medical society guideline, peer-reviewed paper) and a corresponding deviation in the record.

• Daubert challenge preparation

  Opposing experts’ prior testimony, peer-reviewed track record, and methodological gaps assembled into a Daubert pre-read — automatically.

• Certificate-of-merit drafting

  State-specific affidavit and certificate-of-merit templates pre-populated from the case record, ready for the consulting expert’s sign-off.

• Expert-witness management

  Engagement letters, retention budgets, scheduling, draft expert reports, and Daubert risk assessment — orchestrated by the supervisor.

• Record contradiction

  Justine will surface — Across a 22,000-page record set, Justine will surface the nursing note documenting a fetal-heart deceleration at 02:14 against the physician’s progress note recording a reassuring strip for the same window — the discrepancy that reframes when intervention was indicated — with both source pages attached for the attorney’s review.

• Standard-of-care anchor

  Justine will surface — On a delayed-cancer-diagnosis matter, Justine is designed to cite the published follow-up interval for an indeterminate pulmonary nodule from the applicable radiology guideline, then point to the record showing the recommended six-month CT was never ordered — framing the departure against real literature, never an invented standard, for the retained expert to adopt.

• Causation isolation

  Justine will surface — Justine will separate the harm attributable to a medication-dosing error from the patient’s underlying renal disease — tracing the creatinine trend before and after the contraindicated dose and modeling the but-for course had the documented weight-based protocol been followed — surfacing precisely where the causal chain holds and where the defense will contest it.

• Daubert exposure

  Justine will surface — Justine is designed to flag where an opposing expert’s methodology departs from the field’s accepted approach — surfacing a prior deposition in which the same expert disclaimed the very technique they rely on here, and a peer-reviewed paper undercutting their error-rate assumption — each grounded against a verifiable authority on CourtListener.

• Damages & life care

  Justine will surface — On a catastrophic-anoxic-injury matter, Justine will model future-medical exposure from the life-care plan against venue verdict comparables for similar impairment, layer the Medicare and ERISA lien totals computed before settlement, and present a pre-suit demand and a bottom-line authority figure — each line shown with its evidence for the attorney to set.

• Statute & merit discipline

  Justine will surface — Justine is designed to compute the limitations and repose clock under the discovery rule for the venue — surfacing a continuing-treatment tolling argument worth 90 days — and to confirm the certificate-of-merit threshold is met by a named consulting expert before the complaint is filed, with every cited authority grounded against CourtListener.

The AI reasons; the attorney decides.