Find Precedents

Multi-factor similarity search using provision overlap, semantic similarity, and outcome alignment.

View Similarity Network
Select Source Case
Source Case: Sustainability - Lawn Irrigation Design

Case Number: 22-10

Year: 2022

View Full Case

Found 10 Precedents

Ranked by weighted similarity score
Matching Methods:
Cosine Semantic embedding similarity Jaccard Set intersection / union Categorical Exact match scoring
40% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
49%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
51%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
36%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
31%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 I.4 II.1.a +1

Topics: Employer Faithful Agents and Trustees Duty to Disclose +1

Citations: Case 07-6

Outcome: None vs Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

37% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
47%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
51%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
25%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
33%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 I.4 III.2.d

Topics: Employer Faithful Agents and Trustees Sustainable Development +1

Outcome: None vs Unclear

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

36% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
48%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
61%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
25%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
0%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 II.1.a

Topics: Community Service/Civic Affairs Duty to the Public Faithful Agents and Trustees +3

Citations: Case 15-12

Outcome: None vs Ethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Unclear

36% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
39%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
44%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
8%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
20%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.4

Topics: Employer Faithful Agents and Trustees

Outcome: Both Mixed

Pattern: Both Transfer

35% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
43%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
47%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
27%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
27%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 II.1.f III.2.d

Topics: Public Statements and Criticism Sustainable Development Duty to the Public

Outcome: None vs Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

34% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
38%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
47%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
0%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
9%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Topics: Public Statements and Criticism

Outcome: Both Mixed

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

33% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
31%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
48%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
25%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
27%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 II.1.f III.7

Topics: Public Statements and Criticism Unethical Practice by Others Duty to the Public

Outcome: None vs Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

32% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
26%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
59%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
25%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
0%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 II.1.a

Topics: Employer Faithful Agents and Trustees Public Statements and Criticism +1

Outcome: None vs Ethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

31% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
25%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
57%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
14%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
24%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 I.4

Topics: Employer Faithful Agents and Trustees Public Statements and Criticism +1

Outcome: None vs Ethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

30% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
28%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
56%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
10%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
20%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: III.7

Topics: Public Statements and Criticism Unethical Practice by Others

Outcome: None vs Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

References View all

Richter, M.M. & Weber, R.O. (2013). Case-Based Reasoning: A Textbook. Springer. ISBN: 978-3-642-40166-4.

Reimers, N. & Gurevych, I. (2019). Sentence-BERT: Sentence embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks. Proceedings of EMNLP-IJCNLP 2019, pp. 3982-3992. DOI: 10.18653/v1/D19-1410

Sun, Z., Zhang, K., Yu, W., Wang, H. & Xu, J. (2024). Logic rules as explanations for legal case retrieval. Proceedings of LREC-COLING 2024, pp. 10747-10759. ACL Anthology

Wiratunga, N., et al. (2024). CBR-RAG: Case-based reasoning for retrieval augmented generation in LLMs for legal question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.04302. arXiv

© Licensed under the GNU GPL v3 | Report Issue