HomeSolutionsDefense Lawyers
Medical record review for defense counsel

Know the record better than the side that built it.

Every treatment, gap, and contradiction in the plaintiff’s file — extracted, dated, and cited to the page. Ready for deposition, not just review.

Contradiction found · Doe v. Acme discovery
ER intake · p.214
"Denies prior back pain."
PCP note · p.1,388
"Chronic lumbar complaints since 2021."
Histories conflict — flagged across providersp.214 · p.1,388
47-day gap after MRI — no documented carep.212
+ Add to exhibit list
Bates-stampable source on every line
The status quo

Legal teams spend weeks reviewing claim files by hand — medical records, statements, employment files. Paralegal review and outsourcing are slow, costly, and prone to miss the fact that decides the case.

3 wks
to deposition — and counting
2,400 pp
produced in discovery
1
contradiction wins the cross

Get the defensible blueprint — without assembling it yourself.

Everything you need to assess the case — structured, surfaced, and sourced. Medrecords organizes the file, pulls the key medical facts, and builds summaries backed by citations, so your team works on strategy, not sorting.

Case summary · auto-drafted
p.12 p.47 p.118

Summaries: the whole case in one view

A complete, structured summary that surfaces delayed care, missing records, and conflicting narratives — every claim traced back to the page it came from.

Chronology · by date
Feb 11X-Ray — Chest
Apr 02Progress Note
May 22MRI — Cervical imaging placed inline
Jun 01Gap in care · 47 days
Jul 17Consultation Report

Automated chronology: every event in order

Every page placed by date, provider, and event — with imaging inline and gaps flagged. Scroll the case instead of hunting through PDFs.

Duplicate sets · 4Match similarity
Ambulance Call ReportmultipleReview
Consultation Report84%Review
Progress Note87%Review
Remove all duplicates

Indexing & dedup: a clean, searchable file

Medrecords detects duplicates, flags mismatches, and separates unrelated claimants — so the file you build on is one you can search, filter, and trust.

Cross-checked · multi-modelCase #12345
Patient nameJane Doe
Date of birth1985-04-15
DiagnosisRight arm fracture
Diagnosis codeS42.301A
Surgery date2024-10-07

Built to be verified — not just believed

Multiple models cross-check every extraction. Each field carries its citation and a confidence score, and low-confidence pulls are flagged — so your verification is a click, not a re-read.

Adapts to each claim

Built for legal case strategy.

You shouldn't have to patch together PDFs, spreadsheets, and Word docs to assess causation. Medrecords gives you one structured, defensible view — ready for strategy.

Intake · Case 2025-0412 reading — p. 1,462 / 1,847
PDF ED_records · 214 pp DOC ortho_chart · 1,128 pp JPG nurse_note · flagged
Multi-model read · dedupe · claimant split · index
1,847 pp in 612 unique 14 flagged 1 DICOM study
Organized recordby provider · date
01Jul 17Medical Records
02Jul 17Billing Statements
03Aug 06Physician Notes
612 pp indexed · every row citedopen the case →

Focus on the facts that matter for your defense

Configure custom review templates so you can prioritize what wins — treatment gaps, conflicting narratives, causation. Your team gets exactly what it needs to build the stronger argument.

See the structure of the case before you dig in

Medrecords processes the full record with AI, cross-checks it across multiple models, and cites every line — giving you confidence in the facts before you open the first file.

Who this is for

You're three weeks from deposition. The file is 2,400 pages.

Defense counsel isn't paid to sort records — you're paid to find the fact that turns the case and defend it under oath. Medrecords reads the whole file first, so your prep starts at the strategy.

Prior injuries and contradictions surfaced before opposing counsel finds them
A cited chronology ready to drop into exhibits and motions
Every line of the summary traceable to its source page in one click
Deposition prep · Doe v. Acme cited
Q: "Any prior injuries before the accident?"transcript
2019 lumbar strain — found in intake formEx.14 · p.412
Gap in care — 47 days after MRIp.212
History inconsistent across providersp.88 · p.412
Found in the record — ready for cross
The objection

"Is AI work-product defensible?"

You remain the author. Extractive mode produces zero-inference output — facts and citations only — and every line traces to a Bates-stampable source page. The record behind your cross is the record itself.

p.1,388 where the contradiction was — found on the first pass

"I found the contradiction on my first pass. I would never have gotten to page 1,388 by Thursday."

Defense attorney · insurance defense firm, Southeast

Test it on a closed matter.

See what it finds in a file you already know cold — every finding cited to the page.