Do Any Law Firms Use Both Harvey and LexisNexis?

Do any law firms use both Harvey and LexisNexis?

Yes. Firms use both, and the two companies built the pairing on purpose. LexisNexis and Harvey announced a strategic alliance on June 18, 2025, so Harvey users can get answers grounded in LexisNexis U.S. case law and statutes and checked against Shepard's Citations, without leaving Harvey. Stinson LLP adopted Harvey firmwide in February 2026 and is rolling out Ask LexisNexis with it. DLA Piper was one of the first firms to test the combination.

The verdict in one line: Harvey fits firms building broad generative AI drafting and review workflows; LexisNexis (Lexis+ with Protégé) fits firms whose core need is research grounded in citable primary law; Lexi, the AI paralegal in OpenLaw for Attorneys, fits firms whose bottleneck is operations such as intake, follow-ups, engagement letters and billing rather than research.

One disclosure: we build one of these tools. It gets one entry and one honest take, same as the rest. Lexi is made by OpenLaw. It is not getlexi.io, a different company that also uses the name Lexi.

Who this is for: managing partners, firm owners and administrators deciding whether to pay for Harvey, Lexis or both. Prices checked: October 2026.

Which law firms use both Harvey and LexisNexis?

Two firms have said so on the record, and the alliance makes the pairing available to every Harvey customer. The named examples come from the firms' and vendors' own announcements.

• Stinson LLP: announced on February 5, 2026 that it adopted Harvey firmwide after a pilot with more than 100 attorneys, and that it is deploying Ask LexisNexis alongside Harvey to bring LexisNexis resources into the platform.
• DLA Piper: named by Harvey as an early testing partner for Ask LexisNexis when the feature launched on August 12, 2025.

When the alliance was announced, LexisNexis said Harvey had 335 or more customers in 45 or more countries. That figure tells you the reach of the integration, not how many of those customers license the Lexis content. Neither company has published a count of firms paying for both.

The broader point for a buyer: most large firms already hold a Lexis or Westlaw subscription, so adding Harvey usually means running both rather than replacing one with the other. If you are weighing that decision for the first time, our guide on how to choose the right AI tool for your law firm lays out the questions to ask.

How does LexisNexis work inside Harvey?

Inside Harvey, LexisNexis shows up as Ask LexisNexis: a research option that answers legal questions from LexisNexis primary law and validates the citations with Shepard's. Harvey launched it on August 12, 2025, in open beta for all Harvey users.

What Ask LexisNexis covers

• Content: U.S. federal and state case law, statutes, administrative codes and agency decisions.
• Validation: Shepard's Citations Service, to check whether an authority is still good law.
• Models: answers come from LexisNexis fine-tuned models running on LexisNexis infrastructure, per the June 2025 announcement.

Co-built workflows

The alliance promised two joint workflows, for motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment. On October 9, 2026, the companies released the agentic Motion to Dismiss workflow: Harvey reads the complaint, proposes ranked dismissal arguments, researches each ground in LexisNexis content and drafts the motion, with lawyers approving at set checkpoints.

What Lexis+ with Protégé does on its own

LexisNexis renamed Lexis+ AI to Lexis+ with Protégé in early 2026. On its own it drafts motions, discovery and client letters, researches primary law and Practical Guidance, summarizes documents, builds timelines, validates citations and stores files in a Vault. It also offers a General AI mode that uses OpenAI and Anthropic models for exploratory work. For more on how research tools are changing, see how AI is transforming legal research.

How much do Harvey and Lexis+ AI cost in 2026?

Neither Harvey nor LexisNexis publishes a per-seat price as of October 2026; both sell through sales quotes. Harvey's site has no public pricing page, and LexisNexis says Lexis+ with Protégé pricing is set by organization size and needs.

You will find per-seat numbers on comparison and reseller sites. We left them out because none comes from the vendors, and they vary widely. Treat any number as a starting point for negotiation, not a list price.

What to ask on a sales call if you want both

• Content license: does Ask LexisNexis inside Harvey need its own Lexis license, and does your existing Lexis+ contract cover it? Neither vendor's public announcements say.
• Seat overlap: can you license Lexis content for the litigators who need it rather than every Harvey seat?
• Term and ramp: multi-year terms and pilot pricing are where most of the room is.
• Exit: what happens to Vault files and custom workflows if you drop one tool.

To weigh the spend against hours saved, use the framework in the ROI of AI for law firms.

Are Harvey and Lexis+ AI safe for confidential legal work?

Both vendors say they do not train models on your data, and that is the term that matters most for privilege. Check the contract, not just the marketing page.

• Harvey: its security page states it does not use inputs, outputs or uploaded documents to train underlying models, and lists SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, ISO 27701 and ISO 42001, with annual SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 audits. Customers can choose US, EU, Swiss or Australian data processing and set retention.
• LexisNexis: states customer data is not used to train public AI models and that personalization features are controlled by the user. Infrastructure runs on Microsoft Azure and AWS.
• Lexi: OpenLaw states SOC 2 Type II certification, encryption in transit and at rest, and that firm workflows are not shared with AI labs.

Why the terms decide privilege

In United States v. Heppner (S.D.N.Y.), Judge Jed S. Rakoff ruled on February 10, 2026, with a written opinion on February 17, that documents a defendant made with the free consumer version of Claude were protected by neither attorney-client privilege nor work product. A key reason: the consumer terms let the provider use prompts for training and disclose data, so there was no reasonable expectation of confidentiality. The ruling left open whether enterprise tools with confidentiality terms would come out differently.

ABA Formal Opinion 512 (July 29, 2024) applies the duties of competence, confidentiality, communication, supervision and reasonable fees to generative AI. It says boilerplate consent language in an engagement letter is not enough when client information goes into a tool. Our piece on SOC 2 compliance for legal tech covers what to demand in a vendor review.

Where does each tool still win?

Each product wins at a different layer of the firm, which is why pairing them is common.

Where Harvey wins

Harvey is the stronger choice for broad AI buildout: drafting, document review across large sets, and custom workflows a firm can shape around its practice groups. With Ask LexisNexis it can also reach validated primary law, so it covers more ground in one interface than a research product.

Where LexisNexis wins

LexisNexis owns the content. Shepard's, primary law, secondary sources and Practical Guidance are native, not borrowed, so research answers are grounded in a citator many courts and lawyers already trust. A firm that only needs reliable AI research can buy Lexis+ with Protégé without adding Harvey.

Where Lexi wins

Lexi is not a research database and does not try to replace either tool. It handles the work around the legal work: booking intake recalls, returning client calls, sending follow-ups, drafting engagement letters, collecting documents, preparing filings and posting payments, with attorney approval gates. It connects to Clio Manage, Thomson Reuters and Google Calendar. For the full list, see what Lexi replaces.

Is it worth paying for both Harvey and Lexis+ AI?

Sometimes. Paying for both makes sense when lawyers need a broad drafting platform and validated research in the same workflow; it is wasteful when a firm buys Harvey mainly for research it already gets from Lexis.

Choose Harvey if

• You want one AI platform for drafting, review and custom workflows across many practice groups.
• You have the budget and staff to run an enterprise rollout and pilot.

Choose LexisNexis if

• Research and citation checking are the core job, especially in litigation.
• You already hold a Lexis subscription and want AI on top of it.

Choose both if

• Litigators want co-built workflows such as the Motion to Dismiss workflow, which needs Harvey and LexisNexis content together.
• You can confirm in writing how the Lexis content license works inside Harvey.

Choose Lexi if

• Your hours go to intake, client calls, engagement letters and billing rather than research.
• You want an AI paralegal that works beside whatever research tool you already use.

The verdict: large firms building AI across practices will often run Harvey and LexisNexis together; research-led firms can stop at Lexis+ with Protégé; small and mid-size firms whose bottleneck is operations get more from Lexi than from either.