Voir Dire — Pre-filing review intelligence

Scan any motion.
Surface every flaw.
Find every angle.

Your associate proofed it. Your partner skimmed it. Now find out what they both missed — before it reaches the clerk.

Scan your first document free → See what it catches

Error categories checked

Reports per scan

<60s

Full document analysis

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY JOHN A. MITCHELL, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 2024-CV-08841 ACME CORP LLC, Defendant. DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS Defendant Acme Corp LLC respectfully moves this Court to dismiss the claims asserted by Plaintiff John Mitchell pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). This motion is timely filed. The complaint was served on March 3, 2024. This motion is due within 21 days of service on February 28, 2024. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Court dismiss Plaintiff's complaint...

1 critical · 1 warning · 2 passed

The problem

One missed error.
One dismissed case.

Courts dismiss motions for inconsistent party names. Judges strike briefs with defective signature blocks. Clerks reject filings with wrong case number formats. These aren't rare edge cases — they happen in firms of every size, every week.

No associate catches everything under deadline pressure. No partner has time to proof every page. That's what Voir Dire is for.

High stakes

Filing defects are among the most cited causes of legal malpractice claims — and the most preventable

Every draft

Mechanical errors appear in first drafts across firms of every size — not because attorneys are careless, but because deadlines are relentless

No margin

Courts do not grade on a curve. A defective signature block or inconsistent party name carries the same consequence as a missed argument

Hours saved

Manual proofing of a complex motion takes hours. Voir Dire surfaces the same issues in under 60 seconds — with fixes attached

What Voir Dire does

Three reports.
One scan.
Nothing missed.

🔍

Document scan

Catch every filing defect before it reaches the clerk

Voir Dire reads your document the way an opposing counsel would — hunting for anything that could get it rejected, stricken, or used against you.

Party name consistency throughout
Dates, deadlines, contradictions
Signature block completeness
Statutory citation validity
Certificate of service
Caption and case number format
Required attachments and exhibits

⚖

Case precedents

Surface the controlling law your document should cite

Every scan returns a curated set of the most relevant cases and statutes — landmark rulings, supporting precedent, and the adverse cases you need to be ready for.

Landmark and controlling cases
Supporting and adverse precedent
Relevant statutes and regulations
Plain English holdings
Why each case matters to this filing

🎯

Legal angles

Find the claims and defenses your document isn't using yet

Voir Dire reads between the lines — identifying additional causes of action, unraised defenses, counterclaims, and regulatory routes the facts in this document could support.

Additional claims available on the facts
Unraised defenses worth considering
Parallel regulatory complaint options
Damages theories not currently pled
Strength rating: strong / moderate / speculative

See it in action

This is what a
real scan looks like.

motion_to_dismiss.pdf · Texas · 12 pages

Scanned in 48s

Full Document Intelligence Report

Motion · Harris County District Court · 9 checks performed · 4 precedents · 3 angles

Critical

Warnings

Passed

🔍 Defects & Checks

⚖ Precedents

🎯 Legal Angles

Critical Party name inconsistency — caption vs. body Party Names

Finding: The caption identifies the plaintiff as "John A. Mitchell" but the body of the motion refers to "John Mitchell" (no middle initial) in paragraphs 3, 7, and 12. Courts have stricken motions for less — opposing counsel will notice.

Recommended Fix

Standardize to the full legal name "John A. Mitchell" as it appears on the complaint throughout. Do a find-and-replace before filing.

Critical Contradictory dates — service and deadline calculation Dates

Finding: Page 2 states the complaint was served on March 3, 2024 and that this motion is timely filed within 21 days. Page 4 states the motion is due "on or before February 28, 2024" — a date that precedes service. The deadline calculation is internally impossible.

Recommended Fix

Recalculate: 21 days from March 3 = March 24, 2024. Update page 4 to reflect the correct deadline and verify against TRCP Rule 99.

Warning Certificate of service — method of service not specified Certificate of Service

Finding: Certificate of service is present and signed, but does not specify the method of service (mail, e-service, hand delivery). TRCP Rule 21a requires the method to be stated.

Recommended Fix

Add: "…was served on counsel of record via [e-service / first-class mail / hand delivery] on [date]."

Pass Signature block — complete and properly formatted Signature Block

⚖ Relevant precedent identified

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly

550 U.S. 544 (2007)

Landmark

Why this matters here

This motion argues the complaint fails to state a plausible claim. Twombly is the controlling standard — your motion should cite it explicitly in the 12(b)(6) argument section. It is currently absent from the brief.

This is a representative sample scan. Actual results vary by document. Precedent citations should be independently verified.

About Voir Dire

"Built for the details that end cases. Powered by AI that never skims."

Voir Dire was built by someone with formal paralegal training who understood something most legal tech founders miss: the most dangerous errors in legal documents aren't the hard legal questions. They're the mechanical ones — the wrong name, the impossible date, the missing signature line — the things that get cases thrown out before they're ever heard.

Those are exactly the errors AI is extraordinarily good at catching, if the system is designed by someone who knows what to look for. That's what Voir Dire is — a precision tool that reads your documents the way opposing counsel would, hunting for anything that could be used against you.

Voir Dire is an early-stage product. It is not a law firm, not a lawyer, and not a substitute for attorney review. It is a tool designed to make your review faster, more thorough, and more defensible.

Scope: Voir Dire is currently optimized for motions and briefs filed in U.S. federal and state courts. Additional document types are in development. Precedent citations surfaced by Voir Dire should be independently verified before reliance — legal databases change and AI systems can err. This tool is designed to support attorney review, not replace it.

Pricing

Simple pricing.
No surprises.

Pilot pricing — locked in for the life of your subscription. Currently accepting solo practitioners and small firms for early pilots.

Solo practitioner

^$99

per month · 1 seat

For solo attorneys who file regularly and can't afford to miss anything.

Unlimited document scans
PDF, DOCX, paste text input
All 7 filing checks
Case precedent research
Strategic angles report
PDF export of every report
Scan history (90 days)

Scan any motion. Surface every flaw. Find every angle.

One missed error.One dismissed case.

Three reports.One scan.Nothing missed.

Catch every filing defect before it reaches the clerk

Surface the controlling law your document should cite

Find the claims and defenses your document isn't using yet

This is what areal scan looks like.

Simple pricing.No surprises.

The next filingshouldn't be a gamble.

Scan any motion.
Surface every flaw.
Find every angle.

One missed error.
One dismissed case.

Three reports.
One scan.
Nothing missed.

This is what a
real scan looks like.

Simple pricing.
No surprises.

The next filing
shouldn't be a gamble.