Uninformed or Underwhelming? Most Lawyers Aren't Seeing AI's Value
A new ABA report found that accuracy was lawyers' top concern with AI. But legal tech observers and lawyers say it's understanding how the software works that leaves lawyers on the fence and some software on the shelf.
October 29, 2019 at 11:30 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Legal Tech News
Artificial intelligence still hasn't made a true believer out of the bulk of the legal industry, according to the American Bar Association's recently released "Legal Technology Survey Report."
Of the 662 nationwide respondents that took part in the ABA's legal tech survey report, 51% said AI's accuracy was their top concern when implementing and leveraging AI-based technologies in their law firm. Reliability (48%) and cost to implement the technology (46%) followed closely behind.
Still, some law firms and law firm tech consultants and providers say the hesitancy to adopt artificial intelligence is mainly based on not fully understanding how the technology would enhance a lawyer's practice.
"There's this expectation AI is a box you open and you let it run and that is it," said HBR Consulting senior director Andrew Baker. But the reality is, "the technologies and data required and inputs is very foreign to legal organizations. We are not surprised there was a number of letdowns and expectations may have been uneven."
Baker added that, outside of financial data, law firms are "document rich and data poor," and because extracting data from those documents is difficult, it makes advanced analytics, automated documentation and other AI-powered legal services challenging.
"The data isn't accessible in the [classifications] of what you target and want to go after. Generally that's the current state of the market," he said.
While some law firms are struggling to collect and leverage valuable data, Baker noted smaller firms, which represented the majority of the survey's respondents, are at more of a disadvantage because they don't have the trove of data found in Big Law that benefits custom-made AI tools.
"I don't know if you have the volume of data that would require artificial intelligence to review for patterns," added Melissa Green of two-lawyer firm Linarducci Law and chair of the Delaware State Bar Association's small firms and solo practitioners section. "I can't say we've discussed it in our section."
However, some lawyers note AI is finding a receptive audience in various sized firms, when the lawyer's practice entails reviewing massive troves of electronic data.
"I can see significant instances in the discovery process where artificial intelligence can make searching for data easier," said Edward Zohn of Zohn & Zohn and chair of the New Jersey State Bar Association's solo and small-firm practitioners group. Still, "in general, I don't see it as a broad issue for small law firms."
From the vendor's prospective, concerns over AI seem misplaced. Chris Ricciuti, vice president of product management for legal and compliance at AI solutions provider Veritone Inc. noted that while AI-backed software doesn't prevent all mistakes, it can be more accurate than traditional, manual services.
He explained that "what's being missed is that there is no way to do anything 100% [accurate] with a human unless you want to hire a team of people and spend a lot of money and it's not scalable."
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 AllZoom Faces Intellectual Property Suit Over AI-Based Augmented Video Conferencing
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Public Notices/Calendars
- 2Wednesday Newspaper
- 3Decision of the Day: Qui Tam Relators Do Not Plausibly Claim Firm Avoided Tax Obligations Through Visa Applications, Circuit Finds
- 4Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-116
- 5Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
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