Attorney-supervised identity
for legal agents.
Litigation holds must be provably delivered. Privileged communications must trace to attorney supervision or privilege is waived. eDiscovery collection requires defensible chain of custody. Mailgent gives your legal agent the delegation chain, delivery proofs, and audit trails that courts and opposing counsel will scrutinize.
API Primitives used
mail.sendProvable delivery
Send litigation holds, legal notices, and privileged communications with DKIM-signed attribution. Every send is logged with delivery status and delegation chain.
mail.list_messagesEvidence collection
Collect documents and responses via email with full chain-of-custody logging. Each message received is timestamped and attributed to the collecting agent identity.
vault.storePrivileged credential storage
Store court filing portal credentials, document management system tokens, and regulatory authority access keys — encrypted and scoped per matter.
Courts scrutinize AI agent attribution.
Legal AI agents face unique identity requirements that directly affect case outcomes. Under FRCP Rule 37(e), litigation hold notices must be provably sent by an authorized representative — or the court may impose spoliation sanctions. Under FRE 502, privileged communications must be traceable to attorney supervision — or opposing counsel can argue privilege waiver. In eDiscovery, the Sedona Conference Principles require defensible collection with documented chain of custody.
Law firms currently route AI agent communications through shared firm addresses or individual attorney credentials. Shared addresses can't prove delegation of authority. When an agent sends a privileged communication under shared credentials, there's no audit trail distinguishing attorney-reviewed content from AI-generated content — creating privilege waiver arguments that opposing counsel will exploit.
Mailgent provides each legal agent with its own identity carrying a verifiable delegation chain: Attorney > Firm > Agent. Every email is DKIM-signed and attributable. Every document collected is logged with chain-of-custody metadata. The infrastructure that survives judicial scrutiny.
How to build it.
Create a matter-scoped agent identity
Provision a dedicated identity for each legal matter. The delegation chain (Attorney > Firm > Agent) is baked into every action — satisfying FRCP, Sedona, and privilege requirements.
mail.sendSend provable legal notices
Send litigation holds, preservation notices, and legal correspondence with DKIM-signed attribution. Every send is logged with timestamp, delivery status, and full delegation chain.
mail.list_messagesCollect and catalog evidence
Receive documents via email with automatic chain-of-custody logging. Each message is timestamped, attributed to the collecting agent, and tied to the authorizing attorney.
Example prompt
“Send litigation hold notices to all custodians in the Adams matter. Track acknowledgments. Escalate non-responses after 48 hours. Log every interaction for FRCP 37(e) defensibility.”
What law firms build.
Litigation hold management
Agent sends hold notices to all custodians, tracks acknowledgments, sends reminders, and escalates non-responses. Every notice is provably delivered from an authorized identity with delegation chain — satisfying FRCP 37(e) and Zubulake standards.
Privileged communication management
Agent sends legal opinions, case strategy memos, and settlement demands under attorney supervision. The delegation chain (Attorney > Agent) preserves privilege — the communication is provably under attorney direction, not autonomous AI output.
eDiscovery collection and custody
Agent sends collection requests to custodians, receives document packages, and logs chain of custody. Each step is attributable to a specific, identified system — not shared vendor credentials. Defensible under Sedona Conference Principles.
Contract renewal and notice management
Agent monitors contract expiry dates, sends renewal notices, and tracks counterparty responses. Each notice carries a verified legal entity identity — counterparties can validate the communication is from authorized counsel.
Regulatory filing and correspondence
Agent authenticates with court filing portals and regulatory authorities using stored credentials and TOTP codes. Files documents, submits amendments, and retains proof of every filing with attorney delegation chain.
IRS and tax authority communications
Agent communicates with the IRS under Circular 230 requirements. The delegation chain (CPA/Attorney > Firm > Agent) proves authorized representation. Every filing and correspondence is attributable — preventing Circular 230 violations.
Why not shared firm addresses or attorney credentials?
Shared firm addresses (litigation@firm.com) can't prove delegation of authority in court. When opposing counsel challenges your litigation hold process, you need to demonstrate that each notice was sent by an identified, authorized system acting under specific attorney direction — not just that 'someone at the firm sent something.'
Using an attorney's personal credentials is worse: there's no audit trail distinguishing what the attorney reviewed from what the agent sent autonomously. This is exactly the argument opposing counsel uses for privilege waiver — 'the communication wasn't made in confidence under attorney supervision, it was generated by an AI system with no provable attorney oversight.' Mailgent's delegation chain eliminates this argument.
Attorney delegation chain
Attorney > Firm > Agent. Every communication is provably under attorney supervision. Privilege-preserving by design.
Chain of custody logging
Every document collected, every notice sent, every response received — logged with identity, timestamp, and delegation context. Court-defensible audit trails.
Matter-scoped isolation
Each agent identity has its own vault and inbox. Credentials for one matter can't be accessed by agents on another. Ethical wall enforcement at the infrastructure level.
Build legally defensible agents.
Delegation chains, delivery proofs, and audit trails that survive judicial scrutiny.