In the Quest to Innovate, Where Will Law Firms Look Next?
Outsourcing and legal analytics are likely to take up firms' attention in 2019.
December 26, 2018 at 03:31 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
Outsourcing. Some may see it as a dirty word, but corporate outsourcing crossed the transom into legal departments in 2018. Most notably, UnitedLex inked deals with DXC Technology Co., General Electric and Ford Motor Co. to take over processes including negotiating contracts and handling all aspects of a company's intellectual property portfolio. UnitedLex, which in October sold a majority stake to private equity firm CVC Capital Partners, says it inked deals worth an eventual $1.5 billion in an 18-month period.
Some general counsel have been attracted by the savings that come with a professional outsourcing deal. DXC says it cut legal costs by 30 percent. It also rebadged 150 lawyers and professionals from DXC's payroll to UnitedLex's. Those twin tailwinds—lowering costs and increasingly large in-house staffs—suggest outsourcing will continue to spread through legal departments in 2019.
Looking forward to the new year, expect the industry to keep innovating with analytics. Big data may feel like an overused buzzword. Yes, it has been around for a while. But law firms are finally using data analytics in two crucial ways. The first is to better manage their businesses. The second, with the help of a growing roster of tech products, is to be better lawyers.
On the lawyering front, legal analytics took a major step forward at the end of 2018 when LexisNexis launched a new tool that analyzes the language of judges' opinions to tell litigators what cases they cite most often, why, and for what types of motions. Nik Reed, who founded Ravel Law, the company whose technology LexisNexis Context is based upon, says the tool is equivalent to having a conversation with a judge's clerk. The tool represents only the start of a new level of analysis. Reed says the company will look to analyze individual lawyers' briefs, which, when matched with its analysis of judges' opinions, could allow clients to know how frequently certain lawyers craft arguments that judges use in their opinions. Down the line, says Rick Merrill, CEO of litigation analytics company Gavelytics, metrics like that will be the predominant way that lawyers are hired.
“It will be unthinkable to not refer to those metrics when making litigation strategy and tactical decisions,” Merrill says. “People will look back and laugh. 'Can you believe we used to not do this?'”
Analytics will be used to do more than unearth new measurements of the most persuasive lawyers. Law firms are quickly learning how to harness data from their disparate records-keeping systems to create a more rigorous pricing process. Consider a Fenwick & West tool that matches the firm's financial and docketing databases to create a real-time tracker for the cost of its patent prosecution work. The application helps partners who manage the process know when deadlines are coming up, while also showing the firm if a matter is running above cost. The firm plans to apply a similar system for its broader litigation group, says Kevin Vaarsi, Fenwick's director of pricing and product development. The firm has also created an experience database that has captured 20 aspects of 1,000 M&A deals as a way to both help lawyers find relevant documents and for its pricing team to find better ways to price its deals.
“We are transforming the way we operate,” Vaarsi says. “We've come a really long way in terms of making data-backed decisions for financial decisions. But there are always ways we can improve on that.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Better of the Split': District Judge Weighs Circuit Divide in Considering Who Pays Decades-Old Medical Bill
K&L Gates Files String of Suits Against Electronics Manufacturer's Competitors, Brightness Misrepresentations
3 minute readIll. Class Action Claims Cannabis Companies Sell Products with Excessive THC Content
4 minute readPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1‘Undermines the Rule of Law’: Retired US Judges Condemn Trump’s Jan. 6 Pardons
- 2Supreme Court Reinstates Corporate Disclosure Law Pending Challenge
- 3Meta Workers Aren't of One Mind on Company's Retreat From DEI, Fact-Checking
- 4The Gloves Are Off in the Battle for Top Partner Talent
- 5RFK Jr. Will Keep Affiliations With Morgan & Morgan, Other Law Firms If Confirmed to DHHS
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250