CaseMark vs Prevail: how they compare in 2026

Deposition summaries come in analysis, index, page and line, and narrative formats, and CaseMark says a 200 page transcript comes back in under two minutes. Medical chronologies list each provider by date with diagnoses, ICD codes, medications and vitals. A firm can send examples of its own chronology format and get it back as a one click template. Workspace adds chat across a matter's files, Deep Research, custom agents, persistent memory across conversations and matters, and Overtime Mode, which keeps researching and drafting after the first prompt. Tabular Analysis turns hundreds of documents into one table with a CSV or Excel export. In Source, models draft exhibit indexes, propose clip ranges from a plain language description of the testimony and answer questions across up to 50 transcripts. Insight Pass sits in front of every summary. It reads the selected sources, asks three or four questions about audience, side, purpose and detail, and hands a plan to the drafting models. Quick Actions run one click summarize, research, timeline, organize and find tasks, and Organize proposes a file structure and naming for a matter. Workspace usage is metered in money against a monthly allowance, and larger tasks consume more of it.

AI drives the features the vendor leads with, on a court reporting and proceedings platform that would still run without it. The models produce the instant rough transcript of a session, the summaries written while a deposition is under way, and CheckMate's analysis through a connected language model. Transcription and translation of audio and video are AI work too. Around that sits a platform that does not depend on the models: video conferencing built for proceedings, exhibit tools and scheduling, and certified transcripts made by people. The About page says the platform includes a certified court reporter in every session. A firm buys a proceeding with a human record maker, and the AI makes that record available sooner and searchable. The models are the engine of core capabilities rather than the whole product.

Deposition summaries cite page and line and come as Word files or hyperlinked PDFs that open at the testimony. Every medical chronology entry cites its source page. Answers in Workspace's Explore view carry Bates citations, and Deep Research returns a synthesis with linked citations and a source list the user can review. After any summary, Interrogate lets a user ask follow up questions across the whole deposition or record set, with each answer linked to the supporting page. For research beyond the customer's files, case.dev's citation service matches each cited case against CourtListener's database of about 10 million opinions. It returns verified, not found or multiple matches, with the case name, court and decision date. No accuracy figure is published for any output. The terms warn that output may not reflect people, places or facts accurately and must be reviewed before anyone relies on it.

Summaries are grounded to the record in a way a lawyer can follow, and the one accuracy figure has no method behind it. A post of 24 September 2026 on the AI summaries says each section carries a page and line range that opens the rough transcript at that point. It tells users to read the lines themselves before quoting an answer. The commercial page says the AI generally produces a 95% accurate rough transcript, with no test set, sample or definition of accuracy behind the figure. CheckMate's grounding is not published: the help center describes it querying connected models, and nothing states whether an answer cites the transcript line or document it rests on.

In Source, the exhibit index starts as a draft that the court reporter edits, matches to matter files and approves. Clip ranges proposed from a plain language request come back with the matched testimony, a confidence value and warnings, and a clip is cut only once approved. The reporter keeps sole authority over the certified transcript, and Source prepares what surrounds it. Summaries can be aimed before drafting through Insight Pass, and every output links back to its sources. CaseMark describes a chronology as an organized starting point whose dates, statements and conclusions still need confirming against the underlying records. At the platform layer, case.dev tracks each unit of agent work as a work item that a person approves or blocks with a stated reason. Its privilege detection service returns a review recommendation, calling for attorney review, on ambiguous documents. Two modes run with no person in the loop. Overtime Mode keeps researching, drafting and revising after the first prompt, and the Operator handles recurring tasks it has learned through email, Microsoft Teams and text messages. Neither has a stated limit on what it may do unattended.

Human review stands between the AI rough and the certified record. The analysis tools carry a verification instruction and no control structure. Every certified transcript is said to go through a round of human review by credentialed court reporters. A post of 13 August 2026, written after an Indiana appeals judge noted a speaker attribution error, describes the layers. Remote participants get separate audio channels, trained monitors tag speakers live in hybrid and in person proceedings, and scopists check the transcript word for word against the recording before certification. CheckMate has no equivalent review step. It sends questions to language models during live testimony and helps teams find relevant documents and lines of inquiry. Nothing states what its output may not be used for, when it declines to answer, or how a lawyer confirms a point before acting on it in the room.

Ogletree Deakins, Nelson Mullins and Pathway are named as users of CaseMark's platform, and CaseMark counts more than 7,000 attorneys among its users. Fortz Legal Support, a Michigan court reporting and litigation support firm, ran one deposition through several summary vendors alongside peer agencies before choosing CaseMark. After one summary for a client, that client's partner asked for summaries of every remaining deposition in the case, and Fortz now sells summaries as a service. A September 2026 post reproduces one month's usage report from an unnamed mid sized insurance defense firm, for 12 August to 11 September. It shows 38 practitioners working 98 litigation matters, 155 deliverables, 1.25 million pages loaded and 841 attorney hours saved, for a flat $3,500 a month. CaseMark values those hours at about $106,000 on the firm's blended rates and calls that an assumed value. A medical malpractice insurer is described as saving $5 for each $1 spent across 300 panel firms in 36 states. The solutions pages quote results such as 90 percent less document review time for small firms and $11,500 in average savings per case for insurers, without a basis. In the Chock Barhoum LLP story, two weeks of document review shrank to minutes. The partner it features, Sarah Tuthill-Kveton, is also CaseMark's Chief Legal Officer.

Shook, Hardy & Bacon is the one named deployment, with no figures attached. Prevail's release of 23 February 2026 launching CheckMate says the firm has built Prevail AI into its Complex Litigation Strategic Counseling Practice Group for early case assessment, case work up and trial. It quotes Patrick Oot, a partner who co chairs that group, on how CheckMate changes preparation and questioning during testimony. Prevail names Discount Tire, Perkins Coie, Greenberg Traurig and Shook among its clients, without stories. No case study with figures is published, so what changed for the Shook practice in time, cost or outcome is not shown.

Training on customer data is ruled out in the terms, and the security page says documents, transcripts and work product remain the customer's. Under the terms, the customer keeps ownership of uploaded data and any interest in the output. Inside a firm, each matter is shared with read or write permission, and a Document Manager seat covers file work without chat or billing access. Custom agents are scoped to the organization, a matter or one person. CaseMark describes the platform as tenant isolated with no commingling of customer data, and Enterprise adds dedicated compute and isolated inference pools. Model providers sign BAAs with CaseMark, and the case.dev gateway serves Anthropic's models from a zero data retention workspace. CaseMark says the architecture itself protects privilege, through tenant isolation, encryption and audit trails. No published policy covers privilege or work product in what the models see or produce.

Confidentiality sits in the agreement, while the training and privilege commitments sit in published posts that the contract does not include. The terms bind each party to treat confidential information as confidential, and do not mention training or models. A post of 1 April 2026 on protecting privilege discusses United States v. Heppner and states the training position, and a later post extends that position to model providers. Nothing in the contract a firm signs carries those commitments, so they rest on the vendor's published word rather than on terms a firm could enforce.

A No Legal Advice clause in the terms says CaseMark does not practice law, that text from its AI tools is for information only, and that no attorney client relationship forms. Users must be 18 or older and may not present output as written by a person. The service is offered only to people in the United States, and personal data covered by the GDPR may not be uploaded without CaseMark's consent. The products are sold to lawyers, paralegals and litigation support staff rather than to the public. Medical chronologies are described as built for legal team review and not as a substitute for medical or legal judgment. No published material sets out how the product supports a lawyer's supervision of the work it produces.

Supervision of AI work is engaged in public, and the advice line is never drawn. The privilege post names ethics opinions on evaluating AI tools for confidentiality risk and on informed consent. The post on the speaker attribution error quotes the Indiana appeals court's view that anyone using AI to help prepare a transcript is responsible for proofreading it. It separates Prevail's AI rough from its certified transcript. The terms carry no statement that the service or CheckMate's analysis is not legal advice, nothing on who may use the product, and no position on the licensing of digital court reporting by jurisdiction.

A September 2026 post by CEO Scott Kveton sets out what CaseMark weighs when it chooses a model provider. The factors are retention, the reach of a BAA, training terms a provider can change, and dependence on one vendor. In July 2026 CaseMark signed the Open Weights and American AI Leadership letter. Its CEO argued that a model a vendor hosts itself cannot be withdrawn, repriced or quietly retuned under a customer. The agent layer is open to inspection. Linc, CaseMark's terminal agent, is MIT licensed and built on the open source pi agent framework. Its legal skills follow an open standard published through agentskills.legal, and custom skills a firm commissions are portable to other platforms. No results from testing its summaries or models are published.

Nothing published sets out how the AI is governed. No person or function is named as accountable for model behavior, and no testing before a release, evaluation results or principles for how the AI is built and used are published. The SOC 2 and ISO 27001 certifications cover an information security management system, not the conduct of the models. Transcription and speaker identification can fail unevenly across accents, dialects and the more than 90 languages handled, and nothing states how performance is measured across them. Human review of certified transcripts is an oversight step on the record, not a governance framework for the AI.

Customer data is kept for 30 days or for the length of the agreement, then destroyed through a process CaseMark says follows ISO standards. Users can delete a file and its chat themselves, and deletion on request is also offered. Access follows least privilege, with user roles, SAML single sign on and multifactor authentication required on every account. Every user action and system event is logged. Data is encrypted with 256 bit AES at rest and TLS 1.2 in transit. External penetration tests run every year, vulnerability assessments every quarter and dependency updates daily. Staff pass background checks and annual security training. CaseMark publishes more than 130 security controls with their status, among them disaster recovery plans tested each year and cybersecurity insurance. A public status page reports uptime and outages, and payments run through Stripe. No commitment on breach notice to customers is published.

Security controls and breach notice are published in working detail. The security page says customer data is encrypted at rest in AWS S3 with keys managed through AWS KMS. All access to customer data is logged and attributable to individual people, new employees get access only after a background check, and restorable backups are kept. The data security post adds that transcript editors reach only the jobs assigned to them, and that media cannot be downloaded or shared outside the platform. The terms commit to reporting a security breach within 72 hours, with the relevant details.

The terms of service, last updated 1 October 2026, cap CaseMark's total liability at $100, and more than one claim does not raise the cap. Lost profits, lost data and indirect damages are excluded. The service is provided as is, with warranties of accuracy and noninfringement disclaimed, and any warranty the law requires lasts 90 days. CaseMark's suppliers carry no liability under the same clause. The indemnity runs from the customer to CaseMark, covering use of the service, uploaded data and breaches of law or of the terms. No indemnity runs the other way, and wrong output carries no remedy. Enterprise customers sign a separate agreement on top of these terms, and that agreement is not published.

An infringement indemnity and a fee cap are in the agreement, and nothing allocates the risk of AI output. The terms of service took effect on 16 October 2023, under California law with AAA arbitration in San Diego. Prevail defends and indemnifies the subscriber against claims that the service infringes a copyright, a United States patent or a trademark, including reasonable attorneys' fees. Liability is capped at what the subscriber paid in the six months before the claim arose. All warranties are disclaimed, including any that the service will be secure or error free, and the subscriber indemnifies Prevail for its own breaches and negligent acts. Nothing says who bears the loss when an AI rough transcript, a summary or a CheckMate answer is wrong. The terms predate CheckMate and do not mention transcripts or court reporting.

Inside Workspace, files arrive by upload and leave by download or by saving back to the matter. CaseMark's own comparison with Harvey lists practice management connectors as coming soon in the product. The case.dev platform underneath publishes connectors in depth. Clio Manage is generally available. It imports matter documents, communications and tasks into a vault and exports work product to a CaseMark Output folder in Clio. Two way sync keeps documents from each side separate and halts on conflicting edits instead of overwriting either. Google Drive needs enablement and Box is in preview, and change detection, rate budgets and reconnection are set out for each provider. Developers reach the platform through an API with SDKs for TypeScript, Python and Go, a command line tool, signed webhooks and an MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT and Microsoft 365 Copilot. Source exports the litigation support formats that trial software reads, including MDB, PTX, LEF and SBF.

Model and repository connections are described with some detail of what moves, and none reaches a firm's document or case management system. A secure API streams live transcripts and notes to the organization's chosen language model, and the help center documents personal connections and organization connections set by an administrator. On 24 February 2026 Prevail and Consilio announced that Prevail's capabilities would be delivered through Consilio's Aurora platform, letting clients query Consilio hosted document repositories from within Prevail. The announcement said availability would follow, and no later status is published. The government page names integration with RelativityOne and with Teams and Zoom, without describing what syncs. Session Review lets a team download documents singly or as one package. No document management, case management or other litigation support connection is published, and no Relativity implementation documentation was found.

Customer data sits in AWS and Azure in the United States. The trust center adds that it can be stored in other countries when a customer needs that. CaseMark hosts its open weight models in the United States. Isolation rises by tier. The standard service isolates each tenant, and Enterprise adds dedicated compute and isolated inference pools. Sovereign Legal AI on case.dev offers CaseMark Core on a dedicated GPU cluster, dedicated instances of frontier models, or a managed deployment inside the customer's own AWS, Azure or Google Cloud account. The processing location for closed models from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google is not stated. When OpenAI is down, the gateway routes requests to Azure or Bedrock.

Storage and transcription work are both placed in the United States, and tenancy is not stated. The security page names Prevail's AWS region in the United States, and the data security post says customer data stays within Prevail's cloud environment in United States data centers. The government page goes further on processing: all hosting, editing, transcribing and data transfer take place within the continental United States, with no offshoring of data, labor or services. The CheckMate release says customer data stays within each organization's environment, and firms can send analysis to their own language model instead of Prevail's. Nothing states whether customers share infrastructure or are separated at the tenant level, whether a region outside the United States is available, or where a connected third party model processes the transcript it receives.

A SOC 2 Type II report and HIPAA compliance are stated. The trust center, built on Vanta, lists the 2026 SOC 2 Type 2 report and a statement of HIPAA compliance as documents released through a request form. The same center shows more than 130 controls across infrastructure, organizational, product and internal security, each with its status. The report itself, with its auditor and period, sits behind that request form.

Two standards are claimed with the auditor named, and no report, date or scope document can be reached. The home page and the data security post state SOC 2 Type 2 attestation and ISO 27001:2022 certification, both by Prescient Security. The security page says the SOC 2 controls cover security, confidentiality, processing integrity, privacy and availability, and that HackerOne tests the infrastructure several times a year. The government page says Prevail holds authorizations to operate from multiple large federal agencies, none named. No trust center is published, the reports are not offered for download or on request on any page read, and no audit period or certificate date is published.

The case.dev gateway offers CaseMark's own Core Large, Core Titanium, Core Mini and Embed V1 models. It also offers OpenAI's GPT-6.1 Sol, GPT-6 Sol and GPT-6 Luna, Anthropic's Claude Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5, and Google's Gemini 3.1 Pro and Gemini 3.8 Flash. Workspace lets a user pick from more than 100 models, with a cost multiplier shown for each. By its CEO's account, about two thirds of CaseMark's inference runs on open weight models, and its embedding service runs a self hosted open weight model. Anthropic's models are off by default in Workspace and are switched on for firms that ask. Insight Pass uses a reasoning model to plan each report and lighter models to draft it. No commitment covers telling customers when a model or provider changes.

The architecture is described, and the providers of Prevail's own models are not named. A firm can use the native model or connect its own legal AI model, with Consilio's Aurora given as an example. The help center says the native solution is open to all members with no setup. The model or provider behind the native solution, the AI rough transcripts and the summaries is not named, and where those models run, or whether customers hear of changes, is not stated. The help center lists the providers a firm can connect to CheckMate with its own account or a shared organization connection. They are Anthropic Claude, OpenAI, AWS Bedrock, Google Gemini, Azure OpenAI or Copilot, Consilio and local Ollama models. Only a firm's own connected model is known to it; what sits under transcription and the native model is not.

Summaries are sold one at a time with no subscription, at $25 for a legal summary. A medical chronology costs $25 plus $0.01 a page, capped at $100 for one record set of up to 25,000 pages. Transcription costs $5 an hour with a $5 minimum. Workspace starts with a free trial for one user with $5 of usage and no card. Pro is $100 per user a month with $100 of included usage, billed monthly with no annual term. Work beyond the allowance draws on prepaid on demand usage at a 30 percent premium, capped by a team spend limit. Document Manager seats are $20 a month, and a BAA plan starts at $200 per user a month with two custom workflows per firm. Teams, for two to ten users, and Enterprise are quoted. So is Source, which is priced on the certified packages, workflow runs and clips a firm produces. The case.dev developer platform passes model costs through at provider rates and opens with $10 of free usage.

No price appears anywhere on the site. The terms refer to the amount a subscriber has paid under its subscription, without saying what the subscription covers or costs. CheckMate is sold as an add on for new and existing customers, with no price stated. The About page ties feature inclusive pricing to savings of up to 40% on litigation costs. Whether charging is by page, hour, seat or session, and whether translation and summaries are priced apart from the court reporting, is not shown. Every route to a number runs through a demo request or a scheduling contact.

Workspace is sold to solo and small firms, mid sized firms and Am Law scale teams, with in house teams named among its intended buyers. Source serves court reporting and litigation support firms. The solutions pages cover litigation, personal injury, corporate, regulatory and compliance, real estate and family law, plus insurance carriers on the defense side. The workflow library follows that spread, with 663 litigation, 279 transactional, 182 regulatory, 139 corporate and one family law workflow. Record types include depositions, medical records, pleadings, contracts, recordings, and trial, hearing, arbitration and mediation transcripts. Service is limited to the United States, and the Clio connector supports only Clio's United States region. CaseMark's own comparison names bulk review at Vault scale and the breadth of research sources as areas where Harvey is stronger. CaseMark runs monthly Workspace training, with a recorded session aimed at insurance defense. Government buyers are not addressed.

Law firms, corporate legal departments and federal agencies buy through the commercial and government offerings. Depositions, arbitration hearings and internal investigations are the named proceedings, and the Consilio announcement adds compliance reviews. Sessions run remote, hybrid and in person, transcription and translation cover more than 90 languages, and the government offering adds hearings, interviews and redaction of personal information. The CheckMate release says Prevail holds federal Authorizations to Operate. The blog addresses arbitration in several posts in 2026. No jurisdictions are named for the certified transcripts or the court reporters' qualifications, no practice areas are named for the analysis, and service outside the United States is not stated.