Find Precedents

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

Select Source Case
Source Case: Balancing Client Directives and Public Welfare: Stormwater Management Dilemma

Case Number: 24-01

Year: 2025

Found 10 Precedents

Ranked by weighted similarity score
Matching Methods:
Cosine Semantic embedding similarity Jaccard Set intersection / union Categorical Exact match scoring
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
59%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
62%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
18%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
25%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 III.3.a

Topics: Advertising Self-Promotion Duty to the Public

Citations: Case 20-4

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
50%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
77%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
0%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
14%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Topics: Advertising Misrepresentation/Omission of Facts

Citations: Case 76-4

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
34%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
52%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
20%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
40%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 III.3.a

Topics: Advertising Self-Promotion Misrepresentation/Omission of Facts +1

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
40%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
53%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
29%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
0%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 II.1.a

Topics: Advertising Duty to the Public Self-Promotion +3

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
70%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
66%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
17%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
21%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 I.4

Topics: Employer Faithful Agents and Trustees Duty to the Public

Outcome: None vs Unclear

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

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 Mixed

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
60%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
73%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
11%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
20%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: II.1.a

Topics: Faithful Agents and Trustees Duty to the Public

Citations: Case 20-4, Case 76-4 +1

Outcome: None vs Unclear

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
54%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
55%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
0%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
8%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Topics: Misrepresentation/Omission of Facts

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
40%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
51%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
8%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
7%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1

Topics: Duty to the Public

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
50%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
41%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
7%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
12%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1

Topics: Advertising Duty to the Public

Outcome: Both 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