01 · The research problem
Similar language is not always a similar case
Workers’ compensation decisions often turn on a narrow fact, evidentiary gap, or medical-opinion problem.
Keyword search can find decisions that use the same terms while missing the decisions that apply the same legal standard to a differently worded record. SimilarCase is designed to compare the features that can change the result: the disputed issue, procedural posture, medical evidence, credibility record, legal standard, and outcome-determinative facts.
The system does not treat a shared phrase as proof that two matters are alike. It builds a structured research profile first, then searches the corpus across several evidence dimensions.
02 · Intake
Describe the matter in ordinary language
Start with a short fact pattern or add supporting materials inside the private workspace. The intake pipeline extracts candidate facts and shows them for review before they influence the search.
Disputed issues
The legal question actually being decided, not only the injury label.
Medical-opinion posture
Which opinion was offered, challenged, credited, or found insufficient.
Evidence
Testimony, surveillance, records, reporting delays, and other material proof.
Procedure
The stage, burden, and type of decision that shape the comparison.
03 · Review
Missing information stays visible
The tool asks for clarification instead of silently filling gaps.
- Extracted factors remain editable before and after the first search.
- Unclear or weakly supported factors are marked for review.
- A user can include, check, or exclude a factor from the research profile.
- Answers to clarifying questions rebuild the profile and can change the ranking.
04 · Retrieval
Several search signals work together
SimilarCase combines semantic similarity, full-text retrieval, issue overlap, factor coverage, and authority signals. Each active dimension contributes to the ranking; no single score is presented as a legal conclusion.
Results explain why a decision appeared. The comparison separates shared factors from meaningful differences so researchers can identify both useful analogies and facts that may distinguish the authority.
05 · Source check
The result points back to the decision
Released case-card fields are tied to source passages. When page context is available, the interface shows it with the quotation. A passage without a reliable pinpoint is labelled for independent verification.
Research boundary
A match score measures retrieval relevance. It does not predict who will win, estimate settlement value, or replace professional legal judgment.