Harvey

Useful benchmarks include the scope of the indemnity, triggering events, covered losses, first- and third-party claims, defense rights, caps, baskets or deductibles, survival periods, liability carveouts, and exclusive-remedy provisions. Numeric terms such as caps, thresholds, and survival periods are particularly well suited to side-by-side comparison because Harvey Review Tables can pull discrete data points across a set of agreements.

Compare the same variables across a relevant set of agreements , such as scope, triggers, covered losses, caps, baskets, survival periods, and carveouts, rather than comparing wording alone. Harvey can use Vault and Review Tables to organize those terms across precedent agreements in a structured format, making patterns, ranges, and outliers easier to identify.

The lawyer still decides which precedent deserves weight and which position makes sense for the current deal. This is the real advantage — not simply having more indemnification clauses in your archive, but knowing which precedents matter for the deal in front of you. Harvey makes the organization’s deal history easier to search, compare, and verify, so lawyers spend less time hunting for precedent and identifying unusual positions, and more time negotiating from evidence grounded in comparable transactions.