I help legal and enterprise teams stop reviewing contracts manually at scale and start trusting AI to do it accurately — from clause detection to multi-agent workflows. 100+ clause detection models in production. 50,000 contracts processed. 95%+ accuracy, every time.
"Most people on this work are either lawyers who don't trust the model or engineers who've never read a contract. I've done both — and that changes everything about how I build."
Most AI implementations in legal fail for one of two reasons: engineers who don't understand contracts, or lawyers who don't trust AI outputs. I've spent years on both sides of that problem.
With 6 years as a certified paralegal and 1+ year building enterprise contract intelligence systems, I translate clause-level legal risk into model requirements — then build, evaluate, and deploy those models to a 95%+ production standard.
I've worked across financial services, energy, and law firm portfolios. I know how clause language varies by industry, how to design extraction pipelines that hold up under attorney scrutiny, and how to present model performance to stakeholders who have never seen a precision-recall curve.
That combination is rare. It's why teams bring me in when the stakes are high.
Clause detection modeling, extraction pipeline design, and structured dataset creation from unstructured legal language — built to hold up under attorney scrutiny across financial services, energy, and law firm portfolios.
Multi-agent orchestration with the patterns enterprise AI deployments need: doer + reviewer agent pairs, structural HITL gates at every handoff, low-confidence escalation, and event traces that show exactly what each agent did. See Stride for a live, working demonstration.
End-to-end delivery across 12 enterprise engagements: discovery workshops, governance design, pilot programs, change management, and reusable playbooks that compress program setup from days to hours.
I present AI performance findings to attorneys, legal ops leaders, and executives — bridging the communication gap most technical teams can't close, and accelerating sign-off where it matters.
A financial services client needed to extract and analyze key clause provisions across a massive contract portfolio. Manual review at that volume was cost-prohibitive and slow.
Designed the full clause taxonomy and extraction architecture. Built and evaluated detection models for indemnification, limitation of liability, termination, assignment, and payment obligations using prompt engineering on Relativity's AI platform.
Ran precision, recall, and F1 evaluation at every iteration. Built reviewer playbooks and labeling guidelines so attorneys could audit and trust model outputs before any result entered production.
Rather than starting from zero on each engagement, I developed reusable clause libraries, prompt templates, and reviewer playbooks that could be adapted across financial services, energy, and law firm clients — compressing onboarding time and raising the quality floor on every new matter.
Before building AI models, I was the person doing the work they would eventually replace — reviewing 200+ municipal contracts annually across procurement, public works, and intergovernmental agreements. That hands-on clause analysis became the foundation of how I design detection models today.
Beyond client engagements, I ship working AI applications end-to-end — designed, evaluated, and deployed at production standards. Each one is live, hosted on chantelhill.com, and demonstrates a different facet of how I build: multi-agent orchestration, human-in-the-loop governance, and the same evaluation rigor I apply to client clause-detection work.
A working AI tool for project managers. Seven specialized agents — status synthesizer, risk detective, meeting prep, action tracker, comms tailor, tracker curator, and a reviewer/analyst that critiques every doer's output — execute in parallel and surface drafts at human-in-the-loop gates before any output advances. Built on the Anthropic SDK with client-side orchestration, parallel doer + reviewer phases, deterministic curator logic, and a persistent status tracker that survives across runs.
A working prototype that validates marketing attribution against measured causal incrementality. Built on synthetic data with known ground truth (50 cities, 26 weeks, 100K users), a hand-rolled geo-lift engine using two-way fixed-effects panel regression with cluster-robust standard errors, and a self-evaluation harness scored on precision, recall, F1, and threshold sweeps.
Not because a client asked for it — because anything less isn't defensible in a legal context. If a model can't meet that bar, I iterate on prompt design and labeling guidelines until it does. Attorney trust is too expensive to lose on a bad output.
AI in legal doesn't replace attorney judgment — it has to earn it. Every model I deploy includes confidence thresholds, escalation paths, and audit trail design. Legal ops teams need to be able to explain what the AI did and why.
Gut-checking outputs isn't evaluation. I run rigorous statistical validation, track error patterns across clause types, and document what breaks and why. That's what separates a model that works in a demo from one that holds up on 50,000 contracts.
When attorneys ask "why did the model flag this?" I can answer in legal terms. When engineers ask "what should the model extract?" I can give them a structured requirement. That's where most AI legal implementations break down.
Indemnification language in a financial services agreement reads nothing like indemnification in a municipal contract. My 6 years of hands-on legal review means I build models that handle real-world variation — not just the clean examples that make demos look easy.
Not every AI use case in legal is worth building yet. Part of my consulting work is helping clients figure out where AI actually saves time versus where the error rate makes it a liability. Sometimes saying "not yet" is the highest-value thing I can offer.
If you're scaling AI-assisted contract review and need someone who understands both the legal risk and the technical execution, let's talk.