Josh Standerfer put Eve and a competing platform through the same tasks, side by side, across 10 different document types. Eve won nine of them.

“Eve is quality over quantity,” Standerfer says. “She had more of a senior-level response.”

Standerfer is the trial paralegal at Thomas Law Offices, a personal injury practice spanning Kentucky, Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois.  Before joining Thomas Law in June 2024, he spent 20 years in the U.S. Army: five as a military police officer and 15 as a JAG paralegal supporting cases across multiple jurisdictions.

When managing partner Tad Thomas needed someone to evaluate, choose, and implement the firm's AI platform, he gave Standerfer the project and the freedom to run it his way.

The Side-by-Side Test

Thomas Law Offices had been on a competing platform for about a year when Eve entered the picture. Standerfer wanted to know if they had the right one, so he decided to test them head to head. He pulled ten different types of documents across the case lifecycle: case overviews, medical chronologies, deposition outlines, discovery requests, trial exhibits, voir dire, and more. He ran them through identical prompts on both platforms, then compared the results.

The difference showed up immediately. The competing platform generated longer, broader responses that tried to cover every possible angle. Eve produced tighter work that Standerfer could hand directly to an attorney without heavy editing. “Here’s your top five, versus here’s 50 different scenarios that might not be helpful," he says.

“It was more of a senior level response versus a junior level."

The formatting gap was just as stark. The other platform generated documents in a generic layout. To make anything usable, Standerfer or the attorneys had to copy the text, paste it into Word, and spend 30 minutes reformatting to match the firm’s templates. Most of the team would not bother.

“I’m not going to get people to use a tool where they have to go and reformat everything,” Standerfer says. “They’ll just go find a prior sample and change that instead.”

Eve let him upload the firm’s templates directly. Drafts came back in Thomas Law’s own format, structure, and language. No reformatting. No workaround. Across document types, Standerfer estimates Eve gets attorneys 70 to 75% of the way to a finished product, without having to start from scratch.

Works Right Out of the Box

The firm’s previous platform had been promising document generation in the firm's format for the entire year they were on it. Eve had it from day one. “Right out of the box we had the things we’d wanted for the entire year we were on the other system,” he says. 

The time savings followed. Demand letters that once took days — the previous platform included a human review step — now produce a working first draft in 30 minutes to an hour.

Medical chronologies that the firm used to send to an outside expert, waiting weeks and paying a fee, are now generated in 10 minutes. Eve’s medical overview also surfaces ICD codes, bad facts, and non-economic damages automatically, giving the attorneys what they need to evaluate a case before investing months of work.

“If we have a ton of information up front and this is just a bad case, let’s not continue moving it down the road,” Standerfer explains. “You can see it on the front side, and it pulls out some of those details that you might not even think about.”

The adoption has followed too. Standerfer walks attorneys through the platform one-on-one, and even those who prefer more traditional workflows are coming around. "They’re actually going in and asking questions, which is kind of cool to see,” Standerfer says. “This really isn't that hard. I can just have that back-and-forth discussion with it."

Live in Trial

Thomas Law Offices recently took a case to trial, and Standerfer had been using Eve from the moment depositions were scheduled. For every witness, the first stop was a deposition outline — pulled from the case file, refined through back-and-forth prompting until the questions were right. Then he brought Eve into the courtroom itself.

As defense witnesses testified, he fed their claims into Eve and asked it to verify against the medical records in the case file. Within moments, Eve pulled up the source documents so the attorneys had them ready for cross-examination.

“As the defense witnesses testify, we’re live asking Eve: is that actually what the records say?”

Standerfer explains, “It pulls up the source documents right there, so when it’s time for cross we can say — here’s what was said, here’s where it is. Before, you had to somehow miraculously find that.”

The real-time fact-checking was just the start. The trial work also used two of Standerfer’s favorite custom workflows he’d built. 

The first is a jury sentiment and focus group synthesis. It runs a structured analysis of mock focus group results to surface the dominant juror narratives, persuasion levers, and defense vulnerabilities. The output includes a prioritized list of risk flags, recommended framing language, and actionable edits for voir dire, opening statements, cross-examination, and closing arguments.

The second is a rolling case strategy update. It starts with an initial analysis of the facts, defense theories, and discovery plan, then re-runs targeted checks every time new information hits the file: an expert report, a key deposition, a major document production. Each update flags what changed, why it matters, and what the firm should do next. 

My First Stop Is Always Eve

“It’s never going to replace us,” Standerfer says. “But if I can tell the system, I need a draft, it’s going to give me one. It saves me an hour every time.”

His workflow has become simple. Whatever lands on his desk starts in the same place. “My first stop is always Eve,” he says. “Generate this. Create this. It just starts there.”

Standerfer estimates that paralegals at Thomas Law could handle 10 to 15 more cases on their current caseload — and for a firm running high-volume personal injury work across four states, that kind of capacity changes the math.

For the 20-year Army veteran who spent his career building systems and processes, the answer came down to one thing.

“At the end of the day, you’re going to pick it based on the quality of work that it gives you.”

‍