Reimagining Fact Timelines
in Everlaw

Solving the narrative gap in litigation, enabling legal teams to move
beyond raw data and proactively evaluate case claims and risk

Role: Design lead (sole designer)
Type: 0→1 strategic initiative
Released: December 2025
Collaborators: PM, engineering

Impact at a glance

  • Validated with 20+ attorneys at Everlaw Summit; feedback confirmed strong demand for narrative-focused workflows

  • Established a new mental model (“Facts”) that now serves as a foundation for broader Storybuilder and AI-powered experiences

  • Shifted product direction from incremental improvements → long-term narrative strategy

 

OVERVIEW

Defining the narrative layer for litigation

In complex litigation, attorneys struggle to transform evidence into a clear narrative. Existing timeline tools focus on data entry, not storytelling.

I led design for a new approach to timelining on Everlaw by introducing Facts as first-class objects, enabling attorneys to build, contextualize, and reason about case narratives. This work required advocating for a larger architectural shift rather than a faster incremental solution — trading short-term efficiency for long-term strategic impact.

 

PROBLEM

Attorneys don’t just need timelines — they need stories.

The initial user request was simple: A more visual timeline to capture key events on Everlaw. While Everlaw already had a timeline tool, it was optimized for:

  • An evidence-first, linear date approach

  • Isolated events

  • Minimal contextual relationships

Everlaw-Evidence-Page

Existing Timeline chronology with events

The tool primarily reflected a series of document titles (e.g., "ABC0001," "Enron email thread") and dates, not narrative structure. Visualizing raw evidence this way would not solve the user's core need—it would only create confusion.

Visual timeline illustration

Through research and conversations, we learned:

  • Attorneys often start with conceptual facts or claims, even when no evidence has been introduced yet

  • Narrative building is iterative and non-linear

  • Existing tools forced users to “fit their thinking” into rigid structures

This resulted in:

  • Heavy manual work outside Everlaw

  • Fragmented storytelling across documents, notes, and spreadsheets

  • Difficulty evolving a narrative as cases progressed


It became obvious that timelines aren’t the product — narrative reasoning is.

Attorneys needed a system that:

  • Let them reason about facts before committing to structure

  • Preserved context and relationships

  • Scaled from early case exploration to trial preparation

This reframed the problem from “How do we improve timelines?” to:
“How do we support narrative construction across the litigation lifecycle?”

THE STRATEGIC DECISION

Securing buy-in for a zero-to-one solution

Our research led us to redirect the stakeholder discussion to three possible directions for introducing data extraction ('facts')—a more critical need than the originally requested timeline view:

Option 1: Refactor and rebrand the existing "Events" tool to align better with users' expectations

  • ✅ Moderate lift

  • 👎 Preserved the same rigid mental model

  • 👎 Would not solve the narrative gap

  • Rejected — incremental improvement, limited strategic upside.

Option 2: Add “Facts” into the existing timeline

  • ✅ Fastest to ship

  • ✅ Some improvement to flexibility

  • 👎 Mixes two competing mental models in one space

  • Rejected — quicker, but overall experience of the timeline could be compromised and unintuitive.

 Option 3: Introduce a new workspace built around “Facts”

  • ✅ Better matches user’s mental models

  • ✅ Enable non-linear thinking

  • ✅ Create a scalable foundation for future features (including the originally requested timeline view and AI integrations)

  • 👎 Higher upfront cost

  • Chosen — despite the risk, this option aligned best with user needs and long-term product strategy.

We advocated strongly for Option 3 and secured buy-in, moving the project from incremental iteration to a strategic platform extension.

SOLUTION

From dispersed data to unified contextual timelines

Fact-first synthesis

We introduced the "Fact" object, atomic units representing claims, events, or assertions — not just document timestamps. Decoupled from evidence, Facts allow attorneys to start with known claims, iterate as evidence comes in, and gradually refine a compelling case narrative.

 

Contextual timelines for complex cases

The ability to create multiple timelines enables users to organize facts by legal issue or entity, instantly visualize gaps, and conduct risk assessment even in the most multi-faceted cases.

 

Seamless platform integration

Users can tag, cite, and reference strategic facts from any document or draft, accelerating case preparation workflows with zero friction and complete data consistency.

 

VALIDATION & IMPACT

Early signals, lasting Impact

photo of users talking about the product

Our users providing feedback during the Everlaw Summit focus group

Because this was a foundational initiative, success was measured through directional validation, not just usage metrics.

What we validated

  • Strong resonance during focus groups with 20+ users

  • Clear recognition of the narrative problem

  • Enthusiasm for fact-first thinking over rigid timelines

    • This is a “huge fix for most users”

    • The experience is “faster, smoother” and “a lot more user-friendly”

    • It would significantly “reduce redundant work and streamline handoffs”

What we planned to measure next

  • Adoption of Fact timelines

  • Frequency of fact creation and reuse across workflows

  • Downstream impact on Storybuilder engagement and suite adoption

TAKEAWAYS

The value of saying no 🙅

This project reinforced that impact often comes from saying no to the easier solution. By slowing down to make the right architectural call, and pushing back on early proposals and stakeholder skepticism, we unlocked significantly more value—for users and for the product’s future.