The consequences of context-window limitations appear in documented failures across the legal AI landscape. Stanford University’s 2024 study provides sobering empirical evidence: testing major legal AI platforms with over 200 legal queries revealed that LexisNexis Lexis+ AI hallucinated 17% of the time while Thomson Reuters’ Westlaw AI-Assisted Research reached 33% hallucination rates. Most concerning, Thomson Reuters’ Ask Practical Law AI provided accurate responses only 18% of the time.