Have your investigation report reviewed by AI before distribution. Fast, expert identification of due-process gaps, privilege risk, and fact-versus-conclusion mixing.
Free and no sign-up required.
Federal only
Your data is protected at every layer
No file selected
Guest uploads are automatically deleted within 24 hours
AI flags fact/conclusion mixing that undermines investigator credibility
Detect due-process gaps (missed witnesses, missing notice)
Identify privilege-waiver risks from over-broad distribution
Free review of HR investigations, internal-control reviews, and litigation-prep timelines
Average Review Time
Compliance Checks
Document Security
Justee's AI-powered investigation report and timeline review tool analyzes HR investigation reports, internal-control investigations, and litigation-prep chronologies for credibility, due-process compliance, and privilege protection. The tool flags reports that mix witness statements with investigator conclusions, omit material witnesses, lack documentation of notice to the accused, or apply inconsistent credibility standards. Justee also evaluates whether the report's captioning, distribution list, and recipient instructions adequately protect attorney-client and work-product privilege under In re Kellogg Brown & Root. Investigation reports often become the central exhibit in employment, regulatory, or commercial litigation. Common report defects include sweeping factual conclusions stated as fact, witness summaries that paraphrase rather than quote, and distribution to non-privileged HR and management teams that waives privilege over the entire investigation. Professional investigation report review preserves credibility and protects privilege.
Upload your contract in PDF, DOCX, or TXT format
Our AI reviews your document for compliance issues
Get detailed findings with risk ratings and legal citations
Use our suggestions to improve your document
Upload Document
Upload your contract in PDF, DOCX, or TXT format
AI Analysis
Our AI reviews for compliance issues and risks
Review Findings
See detailed findings with risk ratings and citations
Take Action
Use suggestions to improve your document
Free Investigation Report & Timeline Comparison • No Sign-up Required • Results in Minutes
Fact vs. conclusion separation
Witness completeness and credibility methodology
Notice-and-opportunity-to-respond documentation
Privilege captioning and distribution control
Timeline accuracy and consistency
Fact and opinion mixed without attribution
Material witness not interviewed
No documentation of notice to accused
Distribution defeats attorney-client privilege
Timeline events with conflicting dates
Fact vs. conclusion separation
Witness completeness and credibility methodology
Notice-and-opportunity-to-respond documentation
Privilege captioning and distribution control
Timeline accuracy and consistency
Powered by Justee AI • Free Investigation Report & Timeline Analysis
Justee recently analyzed a 14-page report prepared by HR and circulated to seven senior leaders for a 220-employee SaaS company concluding an internal investigation into a harassment complaint.
Issue Found: The report stated the accused "was not credible" without identifying what statements supported that conclusion. Two material witnesses had not been interviewed, and the report was distributed to leaders not directly involved in the personnel decision — risking privilege waiver.
Justee Recommendation: We rewrote the report with a fact section (verbatim witness quotes with dates), a credibility-methodology section (specific inconsistencies), and a separate counsel-only conclusion section. We added the missing witness interviews and limited distribution to outside counsel and the GC.
"The Accused was not credible. We do not believe his denials."
"The Accused's account is undermined by three specific inconsistencies: (1) he initially stated he had not entered the office on January 15 (Interview p.4), but card-key records show entries at 9:14 a.m. and 2:32 p.m. (Exhibit 7); (2) two independent witnesses (Smith and Park) heard the statements he denies making, and their accounts agree on time, location, and substance; (3) his account of the March 3 conversation contradicts his own contemporaneous email of that date (Exhibit 9). On these grounds we find the Complainant's account more credible."
Why it matters: Credibility findings should be supported by specific inconsistencies tied to documentary evidence. "We don't believe him" is not a finding — it is a conclusion that an arbitrator, EEOC investigator, or jury will reject.
Partner, Corporate Transactions at Grayver Law Group
| Feature | Justee AI Review | Manual Review |
|---|---|---|
| Review Time | 2-5 minutes | 2-4 hours |
| Cost | Free trial available | $150-500+ |
| Legal Citations | Automatic | Varies by reviewer |
| Clause Suggestions | Included | Extra fee |
| Availability | 24/7 instant | Business hours |
Feature
Justee AI
Manual Review
Review Speed
2-5 minutes
2-4 hours
Cost per Document
Free trial
$150-500+
Legal Citations
Clause Suggestions
24/7 Availability
Justee AI Investigation Report & Timeline Analysis
EEOC guidance on workplace investigations
NLRB investigation procedures
DOJ Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs
Not Legal Advice: The information and analysis provided by Justee AI is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. While we strive to provide accurate and helpful information, our AI-powered service is not a substitute for professional legal counsel.
No Attorney-Client Relationship: Use of Justee AI does not create an attorney-client relationship. Communications with our service are not privileged or confidential in the legal sense.
Consult a Professional: For specific legal matters, we strongly recommend consulting with a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. Legal requirements vary by location and circumstances, and only a licensed attorney can provide advice tailored to your specific situation.
Performance Estimates (*): All statistics, metrics, and numerical claims on this page — including review times, cost comparisons, accuracy percentages, and database size — are estimates based on internal testing, industry research, and typical use cases. Actual results vary based on document type, complexity, length, jurisdiction, and other factors. Cost comparisons reference publicly available average attorney rates and are not guaranteed savings. "1M+ laws and regulations" refers to the breadth of Justee's reference database and does not imply that every provision is checked against every law for every document.
By using our service, you acknowledge that you have read and agree to our Terms of Use and understand the limitations of AI-powered legal analysis. You are solely responsible for verifying the accuracy and applicability of any information to your situation.
Upload your document above to get started. No sign-up required.
Need more reviews? Create a free account
Last updated: May 13, 2026
© 2026 Justee. All rights reserved.
