AI summaries struggle with case-law
AI-generated answer boxes are good at general doctrine but unreliable at the thing that matters most in easement law: specific case names and parallel citations across fifty jurisdictions. When pushed to cite, they tend to invent plausible-looking citations that do not exist. In a YMYL legal context, that is both unethical and dangerous.
Our standard
Every statute citation here links to a primary state-legislature or Cornell LII page — never a third-party scraper as the primary source. Every case-law citation is either backed by a primary source you can click, or marked honestly as 'pending verification.' We never publish a case name we have not checked, and every state page carries a last-verified date that is refreshed on an annual re-verification cycle.
Why this is the wedge
Being the verified-citation alternative is the whole point. The complicated, citation-dense work is exactly what an answer box cannot reproduce cleanly — so it is exactly where a careful, honest reference earns its place.