About us

gno.law makes court opinions searchable and gives every judge a profile built from the public record of their decisions: how many cases went up on appeal, how they came out, in which areas of law — and, case by case, a model's reading of whether the law was applied as it should have been, with the judges graded on it.

It is built by the people behind gno.land, the smart-contract platform with Gno as its language, and gno.world, its open front door. Courts are the oldest public ledger there is; we think their record should be as searchable and as accountable as any chain. Everything here runs on public data: the opinions come from CourtListener (Free Law Project), published under the CC Public Domain Mark, and the site's own policy says in plain words how an analysis is made, reviewed and disputed.

It starts with San Diego: every opinion of the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division One — the court that reviews the Superior Court of San Diego County, family court included — and every published opinion of the California Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal, for the citations.

Tell us what to do next

Write to gnolaw@gnomail.io — or use the form — with suggestions: which courts we should read next (another county, another state, the federal courts), which models we should grade with (we run an open-weight model on our own box and the strongest API models side by side, and the profile lets you switch), a case or a judge we got wrong, or anything else. Every message reaches a person.

Corrections

A judge, a party or a reader who finds an error can write to legal@gno.law; disputed analyses are hidden while they are checked. How the site works, in plain words — the policy, with how an analysis is made, reviewed and disputed.