Create Cited Legal Work Product

Turn a matter chat into work product and keep drafting in Grella. Citations, contributors, review status, and export controls stay close to the document.

Request a demo See drafting flow

Matter conversation

Building work product

Work product

Access-delay response memo

Citations linked

Review open

Export ready

Read the draft

Read a sample work product.

Open a prepared response memo, read its source references, and return to the work-product collection.

Work Products

Collaborative content for Northline Dispute. Store work products for this matter.

Search work products...

Activity

Word documentReview

Access-delay response memo

Source-backed response on the revised access date, critical-path effect, and owner notice sequence.

Aug 20, 2026

JLAS

Word document

Partner case briefing

Concise briefing covering the live issues, strongest evidence, gaps, and next factual questions.

Aug 19, 2026

JLMN

DocumentReview

Extension evidence matrix

Maps each extension contention to supporting facts, source pages, contradictions, and missing records.

Aug 18, 2026

Word document

Chronology summary

Current chronology narrative incorporating the revised programme, notices, inspection records, and change order.

Aug 17, 2026

JLAS

Document

Client conference questions

Questions for the next client conference focused on approval authority, access timing, and missing inspection material.

Aug 15, 2026

Document

Critical path analysis

Compares the baseline programme with the revised sequence and isolates the periods that affect the critical path.

Aug 14, 2026

ASMN

Word document

Project manager interview outline

Interview outline for the project manager covering access notices, approval authority, and the May inspection.

Aug 12, 2026

DocumentReview

Settlement conference briefing

Short factual brief for settlement preparation with the strongest sources, open gaps, and disputed causation points.

Aug 11, 2026

JLMN

1–8 of 8Per page100

Review a matter draft.

Useful work, not just answers

Give the analysis a purpose.

Tell Grella what you are preparing and who it is for. These are examples of work product, not fixed templates.

Matter briefing: Bring the current position, key evidence, and open questions together for a colleague.
Response memo: Build a draft around an issue, the supporting facts, and the points that still need checking.
Interview outline: Prepare questions for a witness using the events and gaps in the matter record.
Chronology summary: Turn the dated sequence into a clear account, with sources close to key statements.

From analysis to work product

Turn a useful answer into work product.

Move cited analysis into a draft without copying it into another tool or losing its matter context.

01
Cited analysis
Build the analysis from the matter record.
02
Work product
Turn the analysis into a draft that stays with the matter.
03
Lawyer review
Check the words, sources, status, and final document.

Matter work product

Find the current draft and its status.

Return to the current draft without searching old chats or rebuilding the matter context.

Work Products

Collaborative content for Northline Dispute. Store work products for this matter.

Activity

Word documentReview

Source-backed response on the revised access date, critical-path effect, and owner notice sequence.

Aug 20, 2026

JLAS

Word document

Partner case briefing

Concise briefing covering the live issues, strongest evidence, gaps, and next factual questions.

Aug 19, 2026

JLMN

DocumentReview

Extension evidence matrix

Maps each extension contention to supporting facts, source pages, contradictions, and missing records.

Aug 18, 2026

Word document

Chronology summary

Current chronology narrative incorporating the revised programme, notices, inspection records, and change order.

Aug 17, 2026

JLAS

Document

Client conference questions

Questions for the next client conference focused on approval authority, access timing, and missing inspection material.

Aug 15, 2026

Document

Critical path analysis

Compares the baseline programme with the revised sequence and isolates the periods that affect the critical path.

Aug 14, 2026

ASMN

Word document

Project manager interview outline

Interview outline for the project manager covering access notices, approval authority, and the May inspection.

Aug 12, 2026

DocumentReview

Settlement conference briefing

Short factual brief for settlement preparation with the strongest sources, open gaps, and disputed causation points.

Aug 11, 2026

JLMN

1–8 of 8Per page100

Find a work product

Lawyer-controlled work

The draft stays reviewable from first line to export.

Citations, contributors, review status, and sources stay close to the work product.

Read about security

Cited context: Open the facts and pages behind key statements.
Visible review: See who worked on the draft and whether review is still open.
Final control: The lawyer checks the wording and controls the final document.

Inside the draft

Review the draft before it leaves Grella.

Read the document, check its source references, and review the proposed response before sharing it.

1 / 2

Fit width

NORTHLINE DISPUTE

Commercial dispute, sample matter

DRAFT FOR LAWYER REVIEW

20 August 2026

Access-delay response memo

Eastern Works Package, Contract NCL-2025-041

To: Northline matter team
From: Jordan Lee, responsible lawyer
Subject: Revised site access and the proposed response

1. Purpose and current position

This memo brings together the current Northline record on access to the eastern work zone. It sets out the agreed sequence, the notice given by Northline, and the evidence still needed before a response is sent.

Change Order 12 records 22 April 2026 as the revised access date. Before that date, access was limited to inspection, survey, and work approved by the Superintendent. The available material supports a change in the access arrangements. It does not, by itself, establish the full period of compensable delay.

2. The recorded sequence

22 April: Change Order 12 sets the revised access arrangements and requires Northline to update the construction programme. The change order preserves the parties’ positions on causation, entitlement, and quantum. [1]

26 April: Northline gives notice that the access restriction may affect completion and reserves its position on an extension of time. The notice should be read against the notice requirements in the contract. [2]

3 May: The project team circulates a revised access sequence. That correspondence supports the order of events, but the attached programme is needed to assess the effect on the critical path. [3]

9 May: The delay log records lost productive time during the restricted-access period. The entries need to be checked against daily site records and the activities planned for that period. [4]

3. Points that remain open

The inspection note dated 16 May uses an earlier date for incomplete access. Check whether it refers to the same work zone and the same scope of work before relying on it in the chronology.

The owner disputes causation. The response should distinguish the access change itself from its effect on planned activities, completion, and any claimed costs. No final conclusion on entitlement should be drawn from the access date alone.

NORTHLINE DISPUTE

Commercial dispute, sample matter

DRAFT FOR LAWYER REVIEW

20 August 2026

Access-delay response memo

Eastern Works Package, Contract NCL-2025-041

4. Proposed response

Set out the access sequence using the contemporaneous documents. Identify what changed under Change Order 12, when the revised sequence was circulated, and which activities the delay log records as affected.

Reserve Northline’s position on delay and additional cost. Explain that the programme assessment is being checked. Do not state a final delay period until the programme evidence and any concurrent causes have been reviewed.

5. Checks before sending

Confirm the signed version of Change Order 12 and the authority of the person who approved it. Check whether any later direction changed the access arrangements.

Obtain the baseline programme and the version circulated on 3 May. Compare the affected activities, dependencies, float, and completion dates.

Reconcile the 16 May inspection note with the access notice and daily site records. Record any unresolved date conflict in the focused chronology.

Check the notice provisions and relevant time limits in the contract. Have the responsible lawyer review the proposed wording, source references, and outstanding evidence before release.

6. Source references

[1] Change Order 12.pdf, page 14. Revised site access, programme consequences, and reservation of rights.

[2] Access notice.pdf, page 2. Northline’s notice and extension-of-time position.

[3] Project emails.pdf, page 8. Circulation of the revised access sequence.

[4] Delay log.pdf, page 42. Recorded lost productive time during restricted access.

Read the memo

Formats and continuity

Continue the draft in the format it supports.

An editable record, a generated Word file, and an exported copy have different controls.

Edit and return: Matter work products persist across chats with source references and artifact history. Rich text supports direct editing. Generated Word work has a PDF preview, Word/PDF downloads, and an assisted revision path under the same work-product identity.
Keep the boundaries clear: Word generation and preview are not an embedded Word add-in or simultaneous co-editing. The reviewed scope does not include a native contract-redlining workflow, contract Playbook, or clause Library. The separately developed complete Templates workflow is not included as available in this comparison baseline.
Export and review: A downloaded document is not a live Grella screen. Check the wording, legal position, and cited material before sharing or revising an external copy. Saving a work product is not legal approval, and new evidence does not silently rewrite it.

Common questions

From a draft to work you can use.

Ask us a question

Ask ChatGPT about Grella.

How do I start a work product?

Start with analysis in a matter chat, then turn it into a draft. Describe the purpose and audience so the work has a clear direction. Keep editing in the matter workspace.

Can I check sources while reviewing the draft?

Is a generated draft ready to send?

Will new evidence rewrite an existing draft?

Guided demo

See how cited analysis becomes work product.

Walk through a demo matter. Start with cited analysis, build a draft, and check the sources before export.

Request a demo Talk to security

Turncitedanalysisintoworkproduct.

Read a sample work product.

Work Products

Access-delay response memo

Partner case briefing

Extension evidence matrix

Chronology summary

Client conference questions

Critical path analysis

Project manager interview outline

Settlement conference briefing

Give the analysis a purpose.

Turn a useful answer into work product.

Cited analysis

Work product

Lawyer review

Find the current draft and its status.

Work Products

Access-delay response memo

Partner case briefing

Extension evidence matrix

Chronology summary

Client conference questions

Critical path analysis

Project manager interview outline

Settlement conference briefing

The draft stays reviewable from first line to export.

Review the draft before it leaves Grella.

Continue the draft in the format it supports.

From a draft to work you can use.

See how cited analysis becomes work product.