Featured datasets
An editorial selection — not paid placement and not ranked by usage. With one provider live, this is the core of the LAW.co legal corpus.
U.S. Court Opinions (LAW.co corpus)
Federal and state court opinions in the LAW.co corpus: opinion text, case name, court, jurisdiction, decision date, docket number, reporter citations, judges, parties and attorneys. Legacy corpus is Caselaw Access Project-structured; newer opinions are ingested from CourtListener plain text behind LAW.co's copyright gate.
- Coverage
- U.S. federal, U.S. state (all 50)
- Records
- Not yet verified
- WEB
- REST
- MCP
- DOWNLOAD
LAW.co AI Case Summaries
LAW.co-generated plain-language summary, holding, key issues, topics and procedural posture for a prominence-selected subset of cases. Only enrichment that passed LAW.co's QA gate (published / approved / auto) is exposed. Machine-generated; not citable as authority.
- Coverage
- U.S. federal, U.S. state
- Records
- Not yet verified
- WEB
- REST
- MCP
- DOWNLOAD
LAW.co Case Citation Graph
Directed citation edges between cases (citing case → cited authority, with pin cite), seeded from CAP cites_to data and extended with eyecite extraction on ingest. Exposed per case as 'authorities cited' and 'cited by'.
- Coverage
- U.S. federal, U.S. state
- Records
- Not yet verified
- WEB
- REST
- MCP
- DOWNLOAD
Three layers of one legal corpus
The 3 featured datasets are chosen by hand and shown in a fixed order rather than alphabetically: the source material first, then the layers LAW.co builds on top of it. Nobody pays for a featured slot, and the list is not ranked by usage.
U.S. Court Opinions is the base: court-authored opinion text and case metadata drawn from the Caselaw Access Project and ongoing CourtListener ingestion. The case summaries are LAW.co's own derived layer, with holdings, key issues and topics generated for a published subset of cases. The citation graph links each case to the cases it cites and the cases that cite it.
Taken together, they are designed to support legal research tools that need both the primary text and a structured way to navigate it. Taken separately, each has its own license and tier, which is why they are listed individually.
How to evaluate a featured dataset
- 1
Separate source from derived data
Opinion text falls under the government edicts doctrine. Summaries and the citation graph are LAW.co-owned and need a license to redistribute.
- 2
Read the quality notes
The opinions listing states that the text is not official or certified, may contain OCR errors, includes some duplicate imports, and carries no good-law signal.
- 3
Inspect the schema
Field names, types and nullability are on each listing, along with sample records clearly marked as demo data.
- 4
Confirm the channel
Featured does not mean every channel is open. Check each listing: opinions, summaries and the citation graph are live over REST and MCP, while bulk download awaits rights confirmation.
Which plan covers which featured dataset
Court opinions are in the standard tier, which the Free plan ($0) includes. The summaries and citation graph are premium, which starts with Pro ($149/mo) and is also included in Business ($799/mo). Enterprise agreements are quoted for teams that need contracted limits.
All three are served live through the same key over REST and MCP. Bulk export is listed for each but awaits rights confirmation; the downloads page explains why.
Record previews on these listings are labeled demo fixtures, so you can study field names and shapes without mistaking placeholders for real cases; the API returns live records.
About featured datasets
Is featured placement paid?
No. Featured datasets are an editorial selection by the Data.co marketplace team. Providers cannot buy placement on this list.
Why are the statute reference values and bill monitor not featured?
Both are contact-only, and their redistribution rights are unknown or restricted. We feature datasets that are closest to being usable through the marketplace.
Does featured mean higher quality?
It means broader and more ready, not verified as more accurate. Every listing, featured or not, carries its own quality notes and caveats.
Can I suggest a dataset for this list?
Yes, through the contact page. Suggestions are welcome, but the list is limited to datasets already on the marketplace, so a new provider has to be listed first.
Can I use the three datasets together?
They are designed to join on the LAW.co case id: summaries attach to a case record, and citation-graph edges point from one case id to another.
How often does the selection change?
There is no fixed rotation. The list is edited by hand, and we expect it to change as more providers are listed.
Other ways to browse
Start building with live data.
API and MCP access is live. Sign up at app.data.co, create a scoped key, or talk to us about your use case.