Motion Analyzer · Citation audit

They cited 24 cases. Do the cases say what they claim?

Upload any motion, yours or the other side's, and every cited case, rule, and statute gets checked against the actual source. Overstated holdings, wrong-posture cases, and quotes that are not in the opinion, ranked by significance and explained in plain language. Your first analysis is free.

First analysis free $10 after that Every flag links to the source
app.clearprecedent.com / analysis / 33a17074

FLAGGED AUTHORITIES

Bethel v. Thorn, 757 So. 2d 1154 (Overstated, medium priority)

What was referenced: Cited as a decision that affirmed dismissal of a fraud count for failing to identify the individual speaker and state time and location.

What it actually says: Bethel largely reversed dismissal of the fraud counts. Its partial affirmance turned on a missing intent element, not on speaker identification.

Why it matters: The speaker-identification language the motion leans on is a different case's holding, quoted inside Bethel.

Source check
Bethel v. Thorn

757 So. 2d 1154 (Ala. 1999)

"In Robinson, this Court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim ... [it] failed 'to identify the individual who actually is alleged to have misrepresented the fact.'"
From the opinion Alabama Supreme Court
Open the full opinion →
Free
Your first analysis, on any account
$10
Each analysis after. No subscriptions.
10.7M
Court opinions the citations are checked against
100%
Of flagged authorities link to the source
What it catches

The problems a citation check misses.

A cite can be real and still be wrong. The Motion Analyzer reads the full source behind every citation and compares it against how the motion actually uses it.

Overstated holdings

A case cited for more than it decided. The analysis states what the opinion actually held next to what the motion claims it held.

Wrong procedural posture

A summary-judgment or post-trial decision deployed as if it set a pleading standard. One of the most common ways motions stretch authority.

Quotes that are not in the source

Every quotation in the motion is checked against the text of the opinion it cites. When a quote is not there, we show you the closest passage that is.

The wrong body of law

A criminal-procedure rule cited where the civil rule was meant, or a case construing a different statute. Rules and statutes resolve to the exact provision cited.

Pin cites that miss

Page cites are checked against where the quoted material actually sits in the reporter. A pin that points at the wrong page gets flagged with the right one.

Authorities that cannot be verified

A citation we cannot resolve to any primary source is flagged as unverifiable, not silently accepted. You always know which claims rest on what.

Who it's for

Three reasons people upload a motion.

You were served

Size up the motion against you.

Before you write a response, know which of their authorities actually hold what they claim, and which ones are stretched past their holdings. The flagged list reads like a map of where to push back.

You drafted with AI

Check it before you file it.

Courts across the country have sanctioned filings with citations that do not exist or do not say what the brief claims. Run the draft through the analyzer before it goes out under your signature.

You cite-check for a living

A day of pulling cases, in minutes.

Paralegals and solo attorneys spend hours pulling each cited case and reading around every quote. The analyzer does the pull-and-compare pass and hands you the exceptions.

How it works

Upload a motion. Read the findings.

No intake forms, no case setup. One document in, one report out.

Upload the motion

Drop the PDF or Word file. The system identifies the jurisdiction and every authority the motion relies on: cases, statutes, and rules.

Every authority gets checked

Each citation is resolved to its primary source: the full opinion, the statute text, the rule as published. Quotes and page cites are verified against the source text itself.

Read the ranked findings

A concise report: what each flagged authority was cited for, what it actually says, why the gap matters, and an angle for answering it. Click any authority to read the source yourself.

Every authority in the report is a live link: the cited case the statute the rule Run your first analysis free →

Found the weaknesses? Answer them.

The Motion Builder reads the same motion and drafts your full response for $25, rebutting each ground with verified authority. The analyzer shows you the openings; the builder writes the brief.

See the Motion Builder →
Bethel largely reversed dismissal of fraud claims against the individual officer, held that knowledge and intent may be averred generally, and affirmed only for promissory-fraud counts lacking any allegation of present intent not to perform. From a real analysis report
Pricing

First one free. Then $10.

Try it on a real motion with nothing on the line. After that, ten dollars per analysis, whether the motion cites four authorities or forty.

$10per analysis

Your first analysis is free on any account. No card required to run it.

  • First analysis: free
  • Every analysis after: $10
Analyze your first motion free →

Free account also includes case search, court rules, citation explorer, judge intelligence, and oral arguments.

  • Every cited case, statute, and rule checked
  • Quotes verified against the source text
  • Findings ranked by significance
  • Click through to the full opinion on every flag
  • Works on your draft or the other side's motion
  • Export the report to Word
Verify our verification

We show our work. All of it.

Every flagged authority in the report links to the source it was checked against: the full opinion in ClearPrecedent, or the official government text for rules and statutes. When we say a quote is not in the opinion, you can open the opinion and see for yourself. When we say a case was decided on summary judgment, the disposition is one click away. An analysis you cannot verify is just another opinion; this one comes with receipts.

The Motion Analyzer reports what the sources say and how the motion uses them. It does not evaluate your case, predict outcomes, or tell you what to file. Those judgments are yours.

Read their motion the way a skeptic would.

Upload it, get every authority checked against the real source, and know exactly where it stretches. Your first analysis is free.