Picture this: You’re building an antitrust case in Central California and want to get an idea of potential outcomes based on everything from judges, to districts, to decisions and length of litigation. In days of law past, coming up with an answer might involve walking down the hall and asking a partner or two about their experiences in such matters, then begin writing a budget around a presumed time frame. This is similar to the experiences of Brian Howard, who prior to digging in the trenches of data for Lex Machina spent roughly four years as an a patent attorney for law firms Durie Tangri and Quinn Emanuel.
Howard says that analytics change the stakes. “Not only are you getting a more precise answer,” he attests, “but you’re getting an answer that is based on more relevant data.”
