A curriculum built for partner-led Tallinn firms: first drafts from your own templates, case-file review at machine speed, and a verification protocol that keeps the lawyering with the lawyer.
The foundation day happens on-site in Tallinn, before any industry-specific work: we audit how each team works, map the right Claude tool to each person, then set it up — so everyone leaves with a setup matched to their role.
The firm splits into practice teams. Each team configures a Claude Project loaded with their templates, precedents, and standard clauses — so every draft and research summary comes out in the firm's own style, not generic AI output. Labs run on a real closed matter so the team can judge the output against work they already know.
Claude Project loaded with your templates, standard clauses and house style: first-draft pleadings, contract mark-ups, engagement letters and client updates — in Estonian, Russian or English.
Case-file and due-diligence bundles summarised into issue lists, chronologies and inconsistency flags — processed in staged chunks for large files, with a human reviewing every output.
Client meeting notes or recordings pasted in → action list, key commitments, follow-up letter draft, and matter update — filed to the right folder. Eliminates the dictation backlog.
The repetitive filing and notification paperwork templated and pre-filled from the matter record — the lawyer reviews and signs off, not retypes.
Claude fabricates case citations with total confidence. It cites cases that don't exist, quotes statutes incorrectly, and produces plausible-sounding legal reasoning that doesn't hold up. This is not a quirk — it's a documented, consistent limitation of every large language model.
Every research and drafting workflow we build includes a mandatory verification step: AI drafts; the lawyer confirms every citation against a source they have read. We install this as a firm rule in Week 2, document it in the AI use policy, and build the verification prompt into the workflow itself — so it can't be skipped under deadline pressure.
In the labs, each team builds reusable Claude Skills and Cowork workflows on its own real work. No coding required — a Skill is a plain-language file that captures how your firm wants the job done, and Cowork runs the multi-step version on your files:
Each lawyer takes one live deliverable — a pleading, a contract mark-up, a client memo — and produces it with the new setup during a normal work week. Time is logged before and after. The review session goes through what worked, what broke, and where the verification protocol caught something.
Each practice team demos what it built to the whole firm. Every workflow gets a named owner and one metric — drafting hours per matter, turnaround on client letters — tracked from month one. Handover pack: prompts, Claude Projects, Skills, Cowork workflows, and the firm's AI use policy, documented and owned in-house.
Not our marketing — lawyers describing their own AI practice in public, on Reddit:
"Drafting tasks that used to take five hours can now be done in around 45 minutes… I treat AI like a highly capable junior associate: it does the initial drafting, quick research, or document breakdowns, and I verify the legal reasoning."
Counsel at a large US firm (corporate & asset finance, 10 years in practice) — also notes his group moved to fixed-fee work because AI made task time predictable.
Read the thread →"I had Claude proofread something for me and in addition to some good proofreading suggestions, it got a mistake in the year for one of my citations. I tested in ChatGPT and Gemini, neither of which found the problem."
A practising lawyer on Claude as a second pair of eyes — the same drafting-plus-verification pattern our Module 2 protocol installs.
Read the thread →"As a lawyer I use AI a lot. Usually for a rough draft after I've given it a lot of the specifics of the case and the laws that apply. I perform the legal research for the AI and then I edit and confirm the results."
The division of labour we teach: the lawyer owns research and judgment, the AI owns the typing.
Read the thread →Public posts by independent lawyers and practitioners on Reddit, quoted as community evidence — not Soch clients, not Soch results. Case studies from the Tallinn cohort will be published as firms complete the programme.
One on-site day in Tallinn — the Week-1 foundation on its own. Firms of 1–50 people.
All four weeks of this curriculum — foundation day plus the law firms build labs, brief and demo day. Firms up to 100.
Flat, per-company pricing — no day rates, no scope creep. You get the exact figure on the scoping call, before you commit to anything.
Book a scoping call