# Faster, Sharper Judgment Search Autocomplete

> Search suggestions now appear faster and match case names, parties, and citations more accurately as you type.

Improved · 18 June 2026

## What changed

Autocomplete in judgment search has been rebuilt to respond faster and rank its suggestions more accurately. As you type, it now matches against case names, party names, and citation fragments together, and orders the results so the most likely case appears at the top of the list. Common spelling variations and transliteration differences in party names no longer cause the suggestion list to miss the case you are looking for, and the response is fast enough that suggestions stay useful rather than lagging behind what you have typed.

The improvement covers both dimensions that determine whether autocomplete actually helps. Speed means the list keeps up with how you naturally type, without the hesitation that makes suggestions feel like they are catching up to you. Precision means the right case is more likely to appear in the first few suggestions, so you can select it without scanning the list for the one result that matches.

## How to use it

1. Start typing in judgment search — a party name, a case name, or a citation fragment.
2. Watch the suggestion list narrow and rerank as you type, with the closest match at the top.
3. Select a suggestion to open the judgment directly, without needing to complete the full query.
4. If the exact case is not in the suggestions, finish the query and run the full search to see all results with filters available.
5. For citations you only partially remember, type what you have — partial citation fragments now surface the relevant case in suggestions even without a complete reference.

## Why it matters

When you already know which case you want, the only goal is to reach it with as few keystrokes as possible. Every suggestion that ranks incorrectly, or that takes a beat too long to appear, is friction across a research session that may involve looking up many cases. Faster, sharper autocomplete means judgment access feels like a natural extension of how you think about a case, rather than a lookup task that interrupts the flow of research.

The improvement also matters when your memory of a case is incomplete. You might remember one party's name but not the other, or a year but not the rest of the citation. The ability to type a fragment and reach the right case in the suggestion list means you can navigate directly to a judgment from a partial memory, without needing to recall the exact terms that a full-text search would require.

For advocates who regularly rely on a familiar set of authorities, this level of autocomplete speed makes those cases effectively instant to access — a typed party name or citation fragment and you are there.

## Good to know

- Autocomplete draws from the full corpus of Supreme Court and High Court judgments, so the improvements in speed and accuracy apply across the entire collection.
- Partial citation fragments work as suggestion triggers. Typing an incomplete citation is enough to surface the relevant case in the list without running a separate citation lookup step.
- The autocomplete changes are about how quickly you arrive at a judgment. The judgments themselves — their full text, metadata, and related panels — are unchanged.
- If you prefer to browse a filtered results list rather than jumping directly to a case, ignore the suggestions and run the full search. The two modes work alongside each other rather than one replacing the other.
- Transliteration handling is more robust than before. The same party name appearing with different spellings across sources is now more likely to return consistent suggestions.

https://niyam.ai/changelog/judgments-autocomplete-faster