Lawyers are often seen as risk-averse and partial to long-established processes and practices, but in recent years, the legal profession has changed and modernized drastically. It has incorporated technology in ways that impact an attorney’s ability to practice more efficiently and effectively. One of these modernizations is the adoption and utilization of litigation analytics, which provides data-driven insights into the past litigation records of law firms, attorneys, courts, and judges regarding trends in findings, damages, resolutions, and remedies.

Litigation analytics has become more than prevalent in the practice of law — in many ways, it has become necessary. The ability to analyze litigation patterns and trends has proven to be valuable in every facet of the legal profession; in fact, Lex Machina supplies legal analytics to law firms, companies, courts, government agencies and judges. Now that practitioners are seeing their clients, opposing counsel, and even judges employing litigation analytics and relying on the underlying data, it’s crucial to discuss two key questions: what makes good legal data and what happens when you rely on bad data?

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]