Citation-backed research and drafting workspace
CiteCanon
Solo lawyers and small firms that want public-source links attached to every output citation.
Legal research comparison
CiteCanon vs Westlaw
A practical comparison for lawyers choosing a research and drafting workflow. The useful question is not which product sounds smarter; it is which one leaves a reviewable source trail for the matter in front of you.
Enterprise legal research suite
Westlaw
Matters that need proprietary citator depth, editorial headnotes, treatises, and firm-approved workflows.
Decision point
CiteCanon
Westlaw
Best fit
Solo lawyers and small firms that want public-source links attached to every output citation.
Matters that need proprietary citator depth, editorial headnotes, treatises, and firm-approved workflows.
Source model
Public legal sources first: CourtListener, Cornell LII, eCFR, govinfo, and source-linked pSEO pages.
Closed commercial corpus with extensive editorial and citator tooling.
Citation posture
Blocks or flags citation-shaped text that cannot be routed to a supported public source.
Strong research environment, but exports still need matter-specific attorney verification.
Cost posture
Free launch beta. Paid plans are intentionally deferred during the fast release cycle.
Commercial subscription or quote-based purchase path.
Use with care
Not a replacement for attorney review, proprietary treatises, or firm-mandated research systems.
Often more platform than a solo needs for first-pass public-source research and drafting setup.
Evaluation checklist
Run the same source audit before switching
Pick three real questions from recent matters. For each tool, record whether the answer cites sources you can open, whether the quoted rule actually appears in the source, and whether the result distinguishes binding authority from persuasive authority.
- Check one case-heavy issue, one statute-heavy issue, and one drafting workflow.
- Export the result and confirm citations remain attached to public or approved sources.
- Keep any unsupported authority in a review queue instead of polishing it into final work.