Legal AI startup Eve has joined the unicorn club, raising $103 million in Series B funding, led by Spark Capital and reaching a $1 billion valuation.
The investment was supported by Andreessen Horowitz, Lightspeed Venture Partners and Menlo Ventures.
Eve’s platform specializes in plaintiff-side law, managing and automating tasks at all parts of a case’s life cycle, including case intake, collecting records, drafting documents, legal research and discovery.
With the sheer amount of documents and information law firms have to handle, the legal field is ripe for AI automation. Eve joins several startups aiming to bring AI into the law field, with legal tech investments reaching $2.4 billion this year, according to Crunchbase.
- Last week, Filevine, which organizes documents and workflows for law firms, raised $400 million in equity financing, reaching a valuation of $3 billion.
- Harvey, a startup that automates legal tasks including contract analysis, due diligence and regulatory compliance, hit a valuation of $5 billion in June and $100 million in annual recurring revenue in August.
Jay Madheswaran, CEO and co-founder of Eve, said in the announcement the company’s “AI-Native” law movement has attracted more than 350 firms as partners, which have used the tech to process more than 200,000 documents.
Eve’s tech has helped firms recover upward of $3.5 billion in settlements and judgments, including a $27 million settlement won by Hershey Law and a $15 million settlement by the Geiger Legal Group last year.
“AI has fundamentally changed the equation of plaintiff law,” Madheswaran said in the announcement. “For the first time, law firms have technology that can think with them.”
Despite its potential, deploying AI in legal contexts poses several risks. For one, AI still faces significant data security challenges, which can cause trouble when handling sensitive documents or confidential information. Hallucination and accuracy issues also present a hurdle – one that Anthropic’s lawyers already faced earlier this year after the company’s models hallucinated an incorrect footnote in its legal battle with music publishers.