Judicial outcome research

Every ruling this judge has ever made, and why.

Not a list of case numbers. The findings of fact, in the judge's own words, from every case that looks like the one on your desk — retrieved in seconds by a system that has read the documents.

Start researching See what an answer looks like

“Every lawyer in the country would mortgage their family farm to pay the subscription.”

A family-law attorney, asked whether this should exist

The client in your office

She has a hard set of facts and a specific set of hopes.

Her circumstances

Married six years
Three children, ages 2, 4 and 7
Works two jobs
Had an affair; it is documented
Marital home in both names

What she wants

Primary physical custody
Periodic alimony
Child support at guideline or above
To keep the house
Fees shifted to the other side

What you have never been able to find out

Whether the judge assigned to this case has ever awarded alimony to an adulterous spouse. How many times. On what reasoning. What the facts looked like in the cases where he did, and in the cases where he refused.

Until now the honest answer was a colleague's recollection over coffee, or three weeks in the clerk's office reading paper.

Ask it in a sentence

Natural language in. Structured filters beside it.

Type the question the way you would ask a partner who had read every file in the courthouse. Then narrow it the way you would narrow a docket search — judge, county, date range, custody outcome, support range, findings issued.

Both work on the same corpus. The sentence finds cases the filters would have missed; the filters make the sentence provable.

Cases before Judge Karpf where the wife committed adultery and still received periodic alimony and the marital residence — show me his findings of fact.

Judge Karpf adultery alleged alimony awarded residence to petitioner findings issued 2016 – 2026

31 matching cases · 44 findings of fact · read in 1.9 seconds

An illustrative question. Your first session runs your own.

The answer, as it arrives

Not a case number. The judge's own reasoning.

Each result is a quoted passage, the page image it came from, a citation, and a link into the full docket. Nothing is paraphrased into a summary you would be embarrassed to cite.

Finding of fact Rowe v. Rowe · SPDR23-00871-J1 · Judge Karpf · decided Mar 12, 2024 Illustrative High · 0.94

“While the Court does not condone the Wife’s conduct, the evidence does not establish that the adultery caused the separation, and the Court declines to bar an award of alimony on that ground. Considering the disparity in earning capacity and the Wife’s role as primary caretaker, periodic alimony is awarded.”

Final Order & Decree, p. 14 · docketed Mar 12, 2024

the page it came from

alimony awarded adultery not a bar residence to petitioner quote · page image · citation · full docket

1 of 44 findings across 31 cases · sortable by outcome, recency, or how closely the facts match yours

Compare

Her facts against theirs, outcome by outcome

Put the desired outcomes for the case on your desk beside the actual outcomes in the cases that resemble it. This is the table that tells you what to ask for, and what to warn your client about.

Case	Facts in common	Custody	Alimony	Residence	Findings
Rowe v. Rowe 2024 · Karpf	adultery · 3 children · 6-yr marriage	Primary to wife	$1,850 / mo · 60 mo	Retained	issued
Delacroix v. Delacroix 2022 · Karpf	adultery · 2 children · 9-yr marriage	Joint, wife primary	$1,200 / mo · 36 mo	Sold, split 60/40	issued
Bell v. Bell 2021 · Karpf	adultery caused separation · 1 child	Primary to wife	Denied	Sold, split evenly	issued
Ashworth v. Ashworth 2019 · Karpf	adultery · 3 children · two incomes	Primary to wife	$2,100 / mo · 84 mo	Retained	docket only

Illustrative rows. In the product, every cell opens the passage it was read from.

Three ways in

Search by judge, by attorney, by circumstance

By judge

A profile assembled entirely from decided cases: how often this judge grants what you are about to ask for, under which facts, and the language he reaches for when he grants it and when he refuses. Every figure states the case count behind it.

By attorney

What opposing counsel has actually obtained in front of this bench — what they file, what they settle, where they fold. Also what you have obtained, which is the first thing a client asks and the last thing anyone can prove.

By circumstance

The fact pattern itself — length of marriage, number and age of children, earning disparity, misconduct, relocation, business interests — matched against every case that shares it, whoever heard it.

Method

Why nothing like this exists yet

Public docket sites list cases. A few will sell you the PDF. None of them have read it. The difference between an index and a reader is the whole product.

The harvest

Cases, dockets and documents are gathered continuously from the public record and kept permanently. Cheap structured data lands first and is searchable immediately; dockets, page images and readings fill in behind it, within rate budgets, forever.

The reading layer

Every document is read by AI in a carefully architected pipeline that extracts citable outcomes: findings of fact, custody awards, support figures, parenting schedules, fee shifting. Each extraction carries its quote, its page citation and a confidence figure, and can be verified against the page by a human.

III

Honest answers

Where the corpus is thin, results say so, tier by tier: docket, documents, readings, outcome. A question that reaches unswept territory never returns nothing — it queues the harvest and shows its progress, and one click moves your question to the front of the line.

A close photograph of a court order, one finding of fact in focus — A finding, as the reader sees it: the words, the page, the citation.

Coverage and conduct

One circuit now. Counted honestly, expanded deliberately.

31,877

cases in corpus

23,829

extractions cited

judges profiled

The Eastern Judicial Circuit of Georgia is live today. The pipeline is jurisdiction-agnostic by design; the constraint on a national corpus is court-by-court access, not the reading. Circuits are added where firms ask for them.

We work only from the public record. Sealed and hidden documents are never fetched. Purchased documents are bought from the court at its published price.

Judge and attorney profiles state the coverage they were computed from, so a percentage is never quietly a guess.

A neoclassical county courthouse at blue hour — Cases at each tier of the harvest, Eastern Judicial Circuit — live counts, refreshed hourly.

Access

Walk in knowing how this ends.

Coverage grows circuit by circuit. If we cover your bench you can be running your own questions today — and if we do not, your county moves up the list the moment you ask. Your saved questions stay private to your account.

Create your account

Already have a seat? Sign in.

No demo theatre. Your first session runs your own cases.