Legal Support Professionals Welcome AI, But Say Legal Tech Needs Improvement
One Legal's 2019 State of Legal Support survey examined some of the biggest challenges facing the legal support profession today and the influence that will have on the direction of legal tech development.
April 18, 2019 at 01:00 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Legal Tech News
Legal professionals aren't worried about forfeiting their seat the table to AI, according to the 2019 State of Legal Support survey from e-filing company One Legal. The report was built from the responses of more than 2,000 legal support professionals working across the U.S.
While some firms have launched entire practices devoted to laws around AI, tools rooted in the technology have yet to catch on among lawyers.
Still, AI could potentially free up legal professionals from tedious chores like data entry, and some see this as more of a threat to their careers than others. When asked for their feelings on the subject, 66 percent of survey respondents indicated that they were not worried about AI laying claim to their jobs.
Lindsey Dean, head of marketing at One Legal, chalks this up to the premium that is placed on human insight.
“We got a lot of comments saying, 'I don't believe AI can react as quickly to changing scenarios in the office. I believe my communications between clients and attorneys are valuable enough that the can't be replaced by something like AI,'” she said.
Though AI might not be picking up steam, legal professionals seem keen on tech-based solutions as a whole. The survey shows that 75% of respondents feel that new technology is making the profession easier, though many still had their work cut out for them. Almost 30 percent of respondents ranked “keeping up with court rules and state statutes” as their number one challenge, followed by 27% who cited managing their time. In third, 18% noted that e-filing was a particular challenge.
While the overall ranking of those categories remained consistent from the 2018 survey, the 2019 figures still saw the number of respondents who consider e-filing to be their biggest legal support challenge double from last year's 9%.
Lindsey Dean, head of marketing at One Legal attributes this to the Los Angeles Superior Court and others like it that have switched over to e-filling, putting pressure on firms to do the same. Once they've opened that door, making the leap to other kinds of tech solutions might not seem quite as daunting.
“[That] can kind of be the tipping point where they go 'oh, OK, well let's see what else we can start to consider as well,'” Dean said.
One potential consequence to legal professionals realizing the value of tech is that they may begin to have higher expectations regarding performance. Only half of survey respondents agreed that most legal tech has been designed with legal professionals in mind.
Per Dean, users tend to gravitate towards tools that can do more than one thing. Instead of deploying workarounds to compensate for gaps in tools that are agnostic of industry, legal professionals could wind up taking developers back to the drawing board.
“I think there's a huge opportunity for legal tech companies to actually kind of go back to the basics a little bit and bring user experience to the forefront,” Dean said.
|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
© 2024 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 AllFactSet Finds New Legal Chief at Financial Data Rival S&P
Freshfields Hires SEC Associate Director in Latest D.C. Lateral Hiring Spree
4 minute readFormer Cahill Executive Committee Member, Leveraged Finance Pioneer Dies at 67
Trending Stories
- 1King & Spalding E-Discovery Director Jumps to Nebraska Women-Owned Firm
- 2Nation's Largest Utility Parts Ways With CLO Who Helped It Navigate Bribery Scandal
- 3Advocates Renew Campaign for Immigrant Right to Counsel in New York
- 4From ‘Unregulated’ to ‘A Matter of Great Concern’: PFAS Regulation under Biden
- 5Public Interest Lawyers in NY Fear Rollback of Federal Loan Assistance in '25, Ask Gov. to Add $4M to State Program
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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