Law Firm Tech Budgets Scrap 'Next Big Thing' in Favor of the Basics
Far from the promise of artificial intelligence-laden solutions, today's law firm tech budgets in reality look very, well, practical.
July 01, 2021 at 05:03 PM
8 minute read
Each week, the Law.com Barometer newsletter, powered by the ALM Global Newsroom and Legalweek(year) 2021, brings you the trends, disruptions and shifts our reporters and editors are tracking through coverage spanning every beat and region across the ALM Global Newsroom. The micro-topic coverage will not only help you navigate the changing legal landscape, but also prepare you to discuss these shifts with thousands of legal leaders at our next virtual Legalweek(year) conference, happening on July 13-14. The upcoming sessions will cover a host of topics, including contracts and document automation, legal business strategies, e-discovery, litigation and data science and more. Click here to learn more and register for the most important virtual legal event of the year!
|The Shift: Law Firm Tech Budgets Scrap "Next Big Thing" in Favor of the Basics
Especially after the pandemic, it's not too much of a leap in logic to picture the "Law Office of the Future," as brought to you by The Jetsons: robot receptions scanning never-ending databases of legal precedent to find the perfect evidence to take before the virtual court. To hear some tell it, these futuristic law firms are only a matter of time, the natural end of technological progression. But a closer look at law firm tech budgets tells a very different story.
Far from the promise of artificial intelligence-laden solutions, today's law firm tech budgets in reality look very, well, practical. For instance, the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) found in a recent report that more than half (52%) of 229 law librarians surveyed said they didn't have an AI/machine learning initiative and had no plans to start one—up from 42% who said the same just last year. A separate report from technology provider Mitratech backs that up, finding that a relatively common technology—collaboration platforms—was legal professionals' top priority in 2021, followed by "general adoption" and use of software, as well as data privacy and security.
This content has been archived.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 AllAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
The Week in Data Dec. 13: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Hochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
- 2Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
- 3Biden commutes sentences for 37 of 40 federal death row inmates, including two convicted of California murders
- 4Avoiding Franchisor Failures: Be Cautious and Do Your Research
- 5De-Mystifying the Ethics of the Attorney Transition Process, Part 1
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