---
title: "List sentences that differ between an existing precedent and its US file"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/knowledge-management/maintain-jurisdiction-specific-variants-of-a-precedent/united-states"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "KM-B12-21-US"
practice_area: "Knowledge Management"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["US"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# List sentences that differ between an existing precedent and its US file

> Set each sentence in the existing precedent beside the sentence in the US file that deals with the same heading, and mark a heading that appears in only one file. Write no new sentence.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/knowledge-management/maintain-jurisdiction-specific-variants-of-a-precedent/united-states  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Knowledge Management](https://ailawframework.com/practice/knowledge-management.md) |
| Human involvement | Red: Lawyer writes; AI may check, clarify or collect data |
| How AI is used | Set each sentence in the existing precedent beside the sentence in the US file that deals with the same heading, and mark a heading that appears in only one file. Write no new sentence. |
| What the lawyer must review | You write any sentence that will be used in a US document. The comparison is between two files the firm already has. It does not supply the US rule. Model Rule 1.1 requires the knowledge and preparation reasonably necessary before a variant is used, and ABA Formal Opinion 512 requires independent verification of a tool's comparison. Model Rule 1.6 applies if either file contains information relating to a representation. A sentence that exists only in an Australian version is not, by that fact, wrong for a US matter, and a sentence that exists only in the US file is not, by that fact, sufficient. You decide both. |
| Written for | United States |
| Applies to | [Maintain jurisdiction-specific variants of a precedent](https://ailawframework.com/practice/knowledge-management/maintain-jurisdiction-specific-variants-of-a-precedent.md) |

## Checking plan

- What the AI does: Set each sentence in the existing precedent beside the sentence in the US file that deals with the same heading, and mark a heading that appears in only one file. Write no new sentence.
- Basis: Checked against the linked sources on 22 October 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance.

## Notes

- The tool does not choose the US rule. If the US file is empty, the output is a list of headings with no pair, and you write the US text.
- Do not treat an Australian defined term as the US defined term because the headings match.

## Sources

- [ABA Model Rule 1.1, competence](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_1_competence/) (checked 2026-10-22)
- [ABA Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (29 July 2024)](https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-512.pdf) (checked 2026-10-22)
- [ABA Model Rule 1.6, confidentiality of information](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_6_confidentiality_of_information/) (checked 2026-10-22)

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*