Unlike a simple search, which relies on a single query, legal research breaks your question down into 4 to 7 sub-questions, run in parallel, to explore it in depth without any manual intervention on your part.
The process takes longer (1 to 7 minutes depending on the question) but produces a result that is noticeably more complete and structured than a standard search.
How legal research works
First, you need to choose the legal mode.
When you launch a legal research, Jimini follows a multi-step process:
It breaks your question down into 4 to 7 distinct sub-questions, covering the principle, the limits, the implementation, and related cases
It runs these sub-questions at the same time, and reviews hundreds of sources for each one (several thousand in total, out of the 6 million legal sources available)
It filters: it keeps only the sources that actually settle the question, not those that simply match the keywords
It reads the most decisive texts and rulings in full (5 to 15 depending on the question), rather than working from mere excerpts
It cross-checks rulings that don’t agree with each other, and presents both positions rather than deciding on its own
If needed, it launches new sub-questions to verify a point or dig deeper into a case it identified on its own
This cycle of breaking down, researching, and verifying repeats for one to a few minutes, with continuous back-and-forth between exploring sources and structuring the information.
A more complete and structured result
At the end of this process, Jimini delivers a memo that includes:
a short answer
the point-by-point analysis, sub-question by sub-question
every statement linked to its source
conflicting rulings flagged, rather than passed over in silence
practical guidance for implementation (which court, what deadline, etc.)
Legal research is therefore slower than a standard search, but noticeably more complete: for a typical question, it reviews hundreds to a few thousand sources and keeps several dozen, compared with 60 to 100 sources read in excerpts for a standard search.
When to use legal research
Legal research is particularly well suited when:
you are handling a practical case or a question that touches several legal regimes
you need a complete overview or a structured note
you want to identify the key issues, concepts, or trends in a topic
you don’t know exactly which questions to ask at the outset
For a simple question, Immediate or Reasoning mode is usually enough (Jimini itself offers to go deeper if the question deserves it).
Example: employment law
Does a criminal prosecution of an employee because of acts carried out in the exercise of their duties oblige the employer to cover their defense costs?
The agent breaks it down into 4 sub-questions, launched at the same time:
The principle. Must the employer cover the defense of an employee prosecuted for acts carried out in the exercise of their duties? On what basis? (≈ 320 sources · 7 kept)
The limits. Does the coverage fall away in the case of personal misconduct detachable from the duties, personal interest, or when the employee acted on the employer’s instructions? (≈ 410 sources · 8 kept)
Implementation. How does the employee obtain reimbursement (request, supporting documents, fees deemed excessive), within what timeframe and before which court? (≈ 270 sources · 8 kept)
Related cases. Is a corporate officer covered in the same way? What role does legal protection insurance play? Are the amounts covered subject to social security contributions? (≈ 530 sources · 19 kept)
It reads the most useful rulings in full, then digs into what it found with 3 more sub-questions:
Verification: Recent developments. Has the Cour de cassation changed its position since the leading ruling? What has it held since 2020? (≈ 130 sources · 1 kept)
Deepening: The criminal outcome. If the employee is convicted or found to have abused their position, can the employer refuse to pay, or recover amounts already advanced? (≈ 140 sources · 6 kept)
Deepening: Intentional offenses. Is an employee who committed an intentional offense, or acted in their own personal interest, still covered? (≈ 250 sources · 5 kept)
Then the agent does the lawyer’s work:
It filters: out of ≈ 2,000 sources reviewed, it keeps 54, based on what they actually rule rather than their keywords.
It reads the 5 decisive sources in full: Article 1194 of the Civil Code, a 2019 Cour de cassation ruling, three recent appellate court rulings.
It cross-checks rulings that don’t say the same thing and presents both positions.
It drafts a memo: short answer, principle and legal basis, limits, effect of the criminal outcome, how to obtain reimbursement and before which court (labor tribunal), the case of the director and of insurance, social security treatment.
The whole thing takes ≈ 2 min 20.