How AI Can Help You Be a Better Litigator

Litigators should be aware of some of the powerful AI and machine learning tools, which can quickly access and analyze large amounts of data and help us make better informed strategic decisions and improve the quality of our advocacy.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
artificial intelligenceAlthough artificial intelligence (AI) has been used in the e-discovery space for more than 10 years, AI is now capable of more complex litigation tasks, such as legal research, drafting pleadings, and predicting judicial decisions, in a fraction of the time it would take a human lawyer to do the same tasks. If AI can help lawyers and law firms more quickly process and analyze large amounts of data, and in turn, make the litigation process less expensive, faster and more efficient, why have litigators been so slow to adopt the newest technologies and capabilities? Understanding and demystifying what AI can and cannot do (i.e., it can help automate the more mundane, repetitive legal tasks and analyze large amounts of data, but it cannot negotiate, advocate, or provide sophisticated legal advice) might help litigators not fear, but rather, embrace AI as a way to access larger pools of data, make more informed strategic choices in their advocacy, and provide better and more efficient legal services to clients.

In simplified terms, AI is essentially highly advanced software that can simulate human thought processes to complete basic, time consuming tasks and produce relevant and accurate results in much less time. Machine learning is a form of AI that employs statistics, pattern matching, and inference to perform a task, as opposed to using explicit procedures. Perhaps that sounds threatening, but using AI tools as an aid to law practice is not just having a moment; it is here to stay and will soon become an indispensable part of practice for all lawyers. Yet lawyers, and litigators in particular, have been slower to embrace and adopt new technology than other professions. According to a survey conducted last year by the American Bar Association, only 10 percent of lawyers used AI-based tech tools for their legal work in 2018 (though those usage rates are higher for respondents working at larger law firms). (The ABA’s “2018 Legal Technology Survey Report” included 900 respondents from across the nation and at firms of various sizes.) A 2019 Bloomberg Law survey indicates that only one in four people in law firms and legal departments use AI-based legal technology. (Bloomberg Law Legal Operations & Technology Survey included 500+ in house and law firm practitioners.)

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 Advance® 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]

Law Firms Mentioned

Trending Stories

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

LEARN MORE

Recommended Stories

Strategic Considerations in Bankruptcy Discovery: Rule 2004’s Limitations in Light of the Pending Proceeding Rule

Michael A. Kaplan, Rasmeet K. Chahil and Amanda K. Cipriano |

The power to commence a Rule 2004 examination, commonly compared to a “fishing expedition,” is not unchecked. The principal limitation is the so-called pending proceeding rule, which prevents a party from using Rule 2004 to obtain discovery that would not be available under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Law.com

'The Terminator Conversation': Legal Tech Won't Replace Litigators, but It Can Improve Them

Zack Needles | Karen Sloan |

This week’s episode features a conversation with Nicole Clark, co-founder and CEO of Los Angeles-based Trellis Research, which helps state court litigators and in-house legal departments use artificial intelligence and data analytics to learn more about the judges they’ll be appearing before, the opposing counsel they’ll be squaring off against and even a little bit about themselves.

New York Law JournalBook

New York Law Journal, serving the bench and the bar since 1888

Get More Information
 

America's Claims Executive Virtual Leadership Forum & Expo 2021Event

ACE Virtual Leadership Forum & Expo is the annual conference for Senior Claims Executives in Insurance organizations.

Get More Information
 

Legalweek Leaders in Tech Awards 2021Event

Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.

Get More Information
 

General Counsel Summit (GCS) 2021Event

General Counsel Summit is the premier event for in-house counsel, hosting esteemed legal minds from all sectors of the economy.

Get More Information
 

More from ALM

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Privacy Policy

About Us / Contact Us / Site Map / Advertise With Us/ Customer Service / Terms of Service/ FAQ / Privacy Policy

Publications

Law Topics

Rankings

More

Law.com

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.