CaseMark vs Harvey: pricing, features and which to choose

CaseMark builds AI for litigation teams, court reporters and litigation support companies. It first became known for AI deposition summaries, and its main product is now Para, which it describes as an AI colleague for legal teams; Para was formerly called CaseMark Operator. Its users include personal injury and commercial litigation firms, paralegals, legal nurse consultants and court reporting agencies that resell summaries under their own brand. CaseMark says it is SOC 2 Type II audited and HIPAA compliant, encrypts data with AES-256 at rest and TLS 1.2 in transit, and does not use customer data to train models on its Pro and Enterprise plans.

Para takes requests in email, Microsoft Teams, Slack, meetings and its web app, and it records meetings on Zoom, Google Meet, Teams and Webex. It connects to Clio, Smokeball, Google Drive and Microsoft 365 for documents. Teams assign it work such as reviewing medical records, drafting demand letters, writing motions for summary judgment or preparing deposition bundles, and Para keeps working after hours, then reports back with drafts and questions. CaseMark says Para checks with an attorney before anything leaves the firm and that work going to a court or client goes out under an attorney's name. Projects, automations, skills and meetings are included on every plan.

CaseMark's strengths are low entry prices, pay-per-file summaries with no subscription, page-level citations, multiple deposition formats, white label options for court reporters and Para's ability to work in email and chat tools lawyers already use. Its weaknesses are a smaller company than the major legal platforms, no case management of its own and inconsistent published rates for some summary types. Filevine and Litify include deposition and medical AI inside full case management. EvenUp and Supio focus on personal injury demands and case analysis. CoCounsel and Harvey offer broad legal AI for research and drafting. Choose CaseMark if you want affordable, cited summaries or an AI colleague without changing systems.

Harvey is an enterprise legal software company founded in 2022 by Winston Weinberg and Gabe Pereyra, according to TechCrunch’s account of its origin. Its March 2026 announcement said more than 100,000 lawyers across 1,300 organizations used Harvey, while the homepage later reported 3,500-plus legal organizations, 200,000-plus professionals, and use in more than 85 countries. In September 2026, Harvey announced $550 million in funding at a $15.5 billion valuation. The company’s March announcement said it had raised more than $1 billion in total funding. Harvey remains an active legal software company. Harvey targets law firms and corporate legal departments through an enterprise sales process. Its products combine legal assistance with shared document workspaces, rather than offering a consumer-facing legal-advice subscription.

Harvey organizes work across agents, Spaces, Vault, contract intelligence, research, and Command Center. A typical engagement starts with a user uploading documents or working in a connected workspace, then asking Harvey to analyze, compare, summarize, draft, or extract information. Vault is designed for querying large document collections, while agents route tasks across complex legal work. Shared Spaces bring firms, clients, and co-counsel into one workspace with governance and ethical-wall controls. Command Center gives administrators visibility into usage across teams, practice groups, and offices. Teams can keep reference documents in Vault and use workflows to repeat a structured task. The platform also offers a Word add-in, reducing the need to move contract drafting entirely into a separate interface.

The company's security page says customer data is not used to train models. Buyers still need to review retention, access controls, and deployment terms against their own confidentiality obligations before putting client documents into production. Harvey’s clearest advantages are its breadth of legal workspaces, model selection, custom agents, document collections, and administrative controls. Its main tradeoffs are opaque pricing, enterprise deployment requirements, reliance on external model providers, and the need for lawyers to check generated work. Clio Duo, Spellbook, LexisNexis Protégé, CoCounsel, Luminance, and Ironclad AI overlap with parts of Harvey’s legal-assistance category, although their product scopes differ. Harvey is the stronger fit for larger firms and in-house departments that need shared legal workspaces, custom agents, regional processing, and governance. Smaller teams should first confirm pricing, implementation effort, and required controls.