A pile of files.
One cited matter.
This is the core of MatterOS - not a feature, the reason it exists. Throw a case’s scattered files in, and get back the document you were going to write by hand anyway: parties, chronology, and facts, every line cited to its source, every call confirmed by you.
Drop everything you have
PDFs, scans, photos taken on a phone, an email thread, a WhatsApp export. No sorting, no naming convention, no folders to build first. Throw it in the way it actually exists on your desk.
MatterOS reads every page
Every document is read in full - parties, dates, findings, tasks - each one anchored to the exact page and, where the text allows it, the verbatim line it came from. Nothing is summarized before it's extracted; it's extracted, then reconciled.
Duplicates merge, conflicts surface
The same hearing mentioned in three files becomes one event, not three. Two files naming different dates for the same deadline don't get silently averaged - both survive, flagged, until you say which one is right.
It asks you what it can't know
Which party do you represent? Is this person a witness or opposing counsel? Which of these two dates is correct? MatterOS doesn't guess at the calls only a lawyer can make - it asks, with the evidence for each answer laid out.
You confirm. The matter page is built.
Once you've answered what needed answering, the matter page exists: parties, chronology, fact ledger, deadlines - the cover note of the case you'd have written by hand, ready to open before every call, every hearing, every filing.
This is what comes out - not a mockup.
The same confidence-first grammar every matter page renders: status, source, and a derived confidence band you can tap to see the arithmetic behind it. Five facts from one small matter - two competing dates, a corroborated notice, a thinly sourced invoice, and a limitation date nobody has produced yet.
Fact ledger · specimen
Ashcombe Ltd v. Renwick Supply
5
Facts
2
Conflicting
1
Gaps
Goods were delivered on 14 March 2026
ConflictingThe supply agreement and the courier thread give two different dates for one delivery.
“…delivery to be completed on or before 14 March 2026…”
Supply Agreement (signed).pdf· p. 7Goods were delivered on 21 March 2026
ConflictingBoth competing dates ship with their citation. MatterOS never picks a quiet winner.
“Left at reception 21/03, signed for by V. Rao.”
Courier thread.pdf· p. 2Notice of breach was served on 2 April 2026
CorroboratedAsserted independently by two documents, with the same date in both.
“This notice is served on 2 April 2026 pursuant to clause 11.2.”
Notice of Breach.pdf· p. 1Invoice 20441 remains unpaid in the amount of £48,200
Awaiting confirmationSourced to a page but no verbatim line could be resolved: thinly sourced, and shown as such.
Ledger export.xlsx· p. 3Limitation date
Missing from the recordA contract matter of this kind should carry one. Nothing in the record establishes it, shown as a finding, not passed over.
No source on record
Illustrative matter, real interface. Tap a confidence band to see the signals behind it. In the product, every source chip opens the highlighted page it came from.
This is the Fact Ledger, one layer of the matter page. The full page also carries the chronology, the parties, and the open questions still waiting on you. Read more about the factual record →
The matter page keeps getting richer.
A case doesn't arrive all at once. Next week's email, a screenshot, a filing that just came back - drop it on the matter, or forward it in. It runs through the exact same read → propose → confirm chain as the original drop: new dates and facts merge into what's already there, nothing you've already confirmed gets silently overwritten, and the matter page never goes stale.
Asked and answered, without hedging.
What exactly comes out of a matter drop?
A matter page: every party identified, a chronology built from every dated event across every file, the key facts with the evidence for and against each one, and the deadlines - all cited back to the exact document and page. Not a summary paragraph - a structured record you can interrogate.
Does the AI ever file anything without me?
No. Every extracted record arrives flagged unverified and stays that way until you confirm it. Where the files disagree - two dates, two accounts, an unclear role - MatterOS asks you directly instead of guessing. Nothing enters the record as settled fact until a human says so.
What if it's not sure about something?
It asks. A missing critical date, a person whose role isn't clear, two documents naming different dates for the same event - each becomes a specific, answerable question with the candidate answers laid out, not a vague "please review" flag.
What happens when more documents arrive next week?
Drop them in, or forward the email - Document Drop runs the same read → propose → confirm chain as the original drop. The matter page gets richer: new dates, new facts, new parties, merged into what's already there. It never goes stale, and it never overwrites something you've already confirmed.
Who is this for?
The solo or small-firm lawyer with a real, scattered case file - not a data room. If your work is disputes and matters, this is the core of what MatterOS does for you.