How Forward-Thinking Organizations Can Leverage AI-Powered Legal Tech
In a recent Law.com article, 72% of legal leaders at U.S. organizations report they have incorporated some form of artificial intelligence into their day-to-day operations. As technology continues to evolve, how can general counsel and their staff use AI-powered legal tech to augment their work, create operational efficiencies, drive down costs and free-up time to help the business make more informed, strategic decisions?
November 30, 2022 at 05:14 PM
4 minute read
While artificial intelligence is typically used to automate manual processes, forward-thinking legal departments are discovering that AI-driven solutions can unlock a host of opportunities, including significant improvements in timelines, budgets, strategy development and business outcomes.
"The increase in remote and hybrid work during the pandemic has heightened interest in new ways technology can help modern businesses and adoption has accelerated," says Tripp Hemphill, Vice President of Enterprise Markets at DISCO.
"In addition, legal departments have come to appreciate the low-to-no barrier of entry possibly with cloud-native legal applications, that 'try then buy' is possible and welcomed by the next-gen legal tech providers" adds Hemphill. "The only true hoop to jump through is IT security approvals which, given such applications live in commercial clouds which have likely already been pre-cleared by IT sec teams, the process is streamlined to an exchange of documentation and certifications. Legal departments can quickly get their pilot projects underway, see results with their data and, armed with experience and metrics, determine if more wholesale adoption would be successful."
The essence of AI
In explaining how AI evaluates and recommends documents in the legal discovery context, Hemphill makes the analogy to facial recognition technologies.
"In a multi-layered process, the neural network analyzes an image – looking for attributes such as skin tone and texture or the presence of a nose, eyes and ear shape – to determine whether a human face is likely present in an image. The neural networks mimic the functions of neurons in the human brain and can be trained. AI's approach to legal documents in e-discovery works similarly in a layered process called deep learning. The technology looks first at the order and relationship between words, then converting these relationships into numbers and mapping the sequences onto a 360-degree plane. These sequences become inputs to the next stage of the deep learning process"
CNN: More than just a news channel
The sequences are put through a convolutional neural network (CNN) that predicts and makes recommendations to the legal team. Over time, the technology's understanding increases and recommendations improve as models are based on more data and input from multiple teams.
Discovery workflows have come a long way from earlier days when search terms were the best "tool" of choice to narrow data sets and find high-value documents. It is generally accepted that search terms are only moderately successful at identifying relevant documents and often fail to identify documents of interest.
"What we are seeing now is the first generation of native-cloud legal technology applications reaching maturity, with fully-integrated AI, becoming the norm," says Hemphill. "Imagine the power and the efficiency gains if you could roll up all of those individual moments of learning while being able to leverage a highly accurate AI model case after case from the get-go."
"Such capabilities, which are available on the market today, present significant cost, time and quality opportunities for in-house and outside counsel alike. Corporate legal departments can build and maintain AI models that capture the uniqueness of their business information while outside counsel can develop models around their specific areas of legal expertise," adds Hemphill. "Though different words and phrases might be used in FCPA investigations for different clients, to the AI, communications regarding bribery look and smell very much the same. Thus, fact evidence identification can be accelerated exponentially."
Pamela Brownstein is a freelance writer covering legal issues and the business of law.
Want to learn more about how technology is changing the legal profession and what that means for your career? Check out DISCO's Just Hearsay podcast where DISCO leaders and their special guests discuss what's new, what's exciting and what's possible with the right legal technology.
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
An AI Danger to Minors: Two Texas Families Want to Shut Down Character.AI
4 minute readAs AI-Generated Fraud Rises, Financial Companies Face a Long Cybersecurity Battle
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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