> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://vaquill.ai/docs/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
# 50-State Jurisdiction Comparison Memo
> One legal question compared across the jurisdictions you pick, grounded in verified statute text, as a memo plus a sortable matrix
**Best for:** multi-state surveys where you need a defensible comparison grounded in actual statute text: non-compete enforceability, statute-of-limitations comparisons, state privacy obligations, wage-and-hour rules, consumer-protection thresholds.
Ask a legal question, pick your jurisdictions, and get a comparison memo where every jurisdiction's section carries verbatim statute citations, plus a cross-jurisdictional synthesis naming the majority rule, the splits, the outliers, and recent amendments.
Every statute quote is verified against the cited section. Quotes that cannot be located are dropped before the memo reaches you.
| | |
| -------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Category | In-House |
| Jurisdiction | US |
| Practice areas | General, employment, commercial, IP, privacy, tort, regulatory, tax, real estate, family |
| Runtime | 3-15 minutes |
## What you need
**No documents.** This workflow runs against Vaquill's US statutes corpus, not against your uploads. It is the one built-in workflow with no document slots at all.
## Inputs
| Field | Type | Required | What it changes |
| ------------------------ | ------------ | -------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Matter / memo title | Text | No | The memo title. |
| **Legal question** | Long text | **Yes** | Frame it as a question. The workflow decomposes it into two to six narrow sub-questions that become the columns of the comparison matrix. Example: "Are post-employment non-compete covenants enforceable, and if so what limits apply?" |
| **Jurisdictions** | Multi-select | **Yes** | Federal (USC/CFR) plus all 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. |
| Practice area | Select | No | Calibrates the decomposition. An employment non-compete question generates different sub-questions than a commercial assignment question. |
| Sub-questions (override) | Long text | No | Power-user override. Supply your own column headers, one per line, formatted `Label -- Question`. When supplied, the legal question is not decomposed further. |
## How it runs
Confirms every selected jurisdiction is supported and has corpus coverage for the question's area, rejecting the run early rather than producing a thin section.
Breaks the legal question into two to six narrow sub-questions, calibrated by the practice area. These become the matrix columns. Skipped if you supplied your own.
Retrieves and analyses the governing statute text for each jurisdiction against each sub-question.
Names the majority rule, the splits, the outliers, and any recent amendments visible in the statute text.
Writes the memo, the sortable matrix, and the citation appendix, after verifying every quote against its cited section.
## What you get
| Artifact | Format | Contents |
| ---------------------------------- | ------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Comparison Memo** | DOCX | Executive summary, per-jurisdiction analyses with verified citations, and the cross-jurisdictional synthesis. |
| **Comparison Matrix** | XLSX | Sortable spreadsheet: rows are jurisdictions, columns are sub-questions, cells are one-line answers with confidence labels. |
| **Citations and Authorities Used** | DOCX | Deduplicated citation appendix. |
## What this will not do
* **Cite case law.** The memo is built from statutes only. Where the statutory text is silent, the answer is honestly labeled "no on-point statute" rather than guessed at.
* Replace primary-source verification. Every citation is verified against its cited section, but pull the underlying section before you rely on it.
* Detect recent legislative changes that have not yet entered the research base. Recency flags surface only when the cited statute text itself mentions a recent enactment year.
* Resolve genuine splits with judgment. The memo names the majority rule and the outliers; you decide which authority controls in your venue.
## Related
The corpus this workflow reads, browsable directly.
For the case law this workflow deliberately does not cite.