Sparcle for Legal

Privileged content stays inside the matter.

Privilege is non-negotiable. Conflicts walls are non-negotiable. Bolt and Aeira ship for that: per-matter ACLs enforced at the index, BYO LLM with on-prem inference, audit chain your partner-in-charge can read end-to-end. The verifier binary is the artifact for client AI-disclosure requirements.

Schedule legal review Browse trust dossier

Compliance frameworks

What Sparcle ships against.

Legal compliance is the intersection of attorney-client privilege, conflicts of interest, ABA Model Rule 1.6 and state analogs, and the emerging state bar AI-disclosure rules. Each frame below maps to a concrete implementation.

Attorney-client privilege + work product

Privilege protection is non-negotiable. Bolt's per-matter ACL enforcement, identity-bound retrieval, and audit-trail responses ensure privileged material doesn't leak across matters, and the audit chain records every retrieval for partner-in-charge review.

Conflicts of interest

The Authority Policy SDK lets the conflicts team encode firm-specific conflict walls at the retrieval layer. Conflicts are enforced before retrieval, not after the fact. Conflict-wall enforcement is exercised by the test suite, not left to hope.

ABA Model Rule 1.6 + state analogs

Confidentiality of client information across electronic systems. Bolt's PII masking at the LLM boundary keeps confidential client material out of any vendor cloud; the BYO-LLM mandate gives the firm direct control over the inference endpoint.

State bar AI-disclosure rules (2024+)

California, Florida, New Jersey, and others now require disclosure when AI is used in legal work. The audit chain is the artifact the firm produces: every AI invocation has a record, and the standalone verifier confirms integrity.

Data residency posture

Privilege boundary, enforced mechanically.

Per-matter ACL enforcement

Aeira's 4-axis ACL pre-filter enforces matter membership at the index, not at the application layer. A user not assigned to the matter cannot retrieve from it — the rows do not enter the candidate set.

BYO LLM + on-prem inference path

Bolt runs against your LLM endpoint — on-prem Llama, Mistral, Qwen, or Azure OpenAI inside the firm's tenant. Privileged content does not leave the firm's network in the supported postures.

Customer-held KMS

Vault Transit, AWS KMS, Azure Key Vault, or PKCS#11 HSM. The firm holds tenant master keys; Sparcle does not. The crypto-shred construction supports matter-specific erasure obligations.

Audit chain the partner-in-charge can read end-to-end

Every retrieval, every action, every tool invocation. The audit chain is the partner-in-charge's view of what happened on a matter, without requiring the firm to take Sparcle's word for it.

1-page brief

Brief in preparation.

Legal-vertical brief in preparation

The 1-page printable brief for legal is being authored with input from design-partner firms. In the meantime, the vertical posture is documented above; the trust-dossier links below surface the artifacts a CIO and partner-in-charge will ask for. Schedule a legal architecture review to walk the deeper material under NDA.

Workflows the founding team has built for

Four anchor use cases.

The workflows below are scoped with legal design partners. The legal Authority Policy pack and matter-ACL enforcement are the per-firm tuning points.

Diligence review with conflict walls

Diligence-corpus retrieval respects matter membership and conflict walls. The Authority Policy ranks current, signed-off materials above unsigned drafts.

Drafting assist with privilege preservation

Draft assembly pulls from the matter's own corpus only. Privileged material does not cross matter boundaries; the audit chain captures every retrieval for partner review.

Knowledge management across matters

Firm-wide KM lookups respect per-matter ACLs while letting partners search across closed matters they have access to. The Authority Policy pack for legal handles practice-area evidence ladders.

Client disclosure of AI use

Time-bounded audit-chain export per matter, with the standalone verifier binary. The firm produces the verifier output for client-disclosure requirements; the client can run the verifier themselves.

Trust dossier for legal

The four artifacts your CIO and partner-in-charge will ask for.

  • /trust/where-the-model-runs — How privileged content is masked before any outbound LLM call; how Mode A (on-prem) and Mode B (in-tenant cloud) preserve privilege.
  • /trust/verify — The standalone audit-chain verifier. Your IT runs it; the partner-in-charge sees the output. The artifact for client AI-disclosure requirements.
  • /trust/subprocessors — Asymmetric sub-processor topology. Why client matters do not transit Sparcle infrastructure in the Helm or air-gap topologies.
  • /trust/incident-response — Five-phase response framework. The runbook a partner-in-charge expects when a security event involves client-confidential material.

Want to walk this against your specific privilege and conflicts posture?

A 30-minute legal architecture review covers your matter-ACL needs, your conflicts walls, your LLM endpoint posture, and the workflows your practice groups need. Founder-led; the engineering team is on the call.

Schedule legal review All industries