New Data Analysis Service Could Help In-House Clients See the Future
Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner says its Clear/Cut leverages predictive coding and machine learning to comb through massive amounts of data and pluck out key information for legal analysts, who use the data to recommend whether clients should settle or forge ahead with litigation.
November 08, 2018 at 03:58 PM
4 minute read
When it comes to data analysis and document review, everyone seems to be searching for the next big thing.
And international law firm Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner believes it has that thing: a combined e-discovery and consulting service that could help in-house lawyers make more informed choices about whether to settle or forge ahead with litigation.
The firm announced this week that it had launched Clear/Cut, a tech-based e-discovery and consulting service that is aimed at the in-house crowd. It's only available in the United Kingdom at the moment, but could be coming stateside soon.
➤➤ Want to read more about how new tech is changing the legal profession? Sign up for What's Next, a weekly briefing on the future of law.
According to the firm, Clear/Cut leverages new technologies to comb through massive amounts of data and pluck out key information for the firm's legal analysts, who use it to recommend the best course of action.
Corporate Counsel spoke with Bryan Cave's Nick Pryor, the firm's London-based innovations solutions director, about the service, which he believes “will help in-house counsel make more confident decisions on how to respond to disputes and investigations.”
What it is: Clear/Cut is an “innovative dispute evaluation service” that relies on machine learning and predictive coding and can be deployed during the initial stages of a case or investigation to evaluate the potential risks that lie ahead, according to Bryan Cave.
In a trademark application filed in August, the firm described Clear/Cut, in part, as “legal consulting featuring the use of analytic and statistic models for understanding and predictive modeling of legal issues, legal trends and actions.”
But it's not just about the technology, Pryor said. He stressed that the firm's tech gurus “train” the machine learning to be more efficient and effective, which helps the firm's lawyers make more targeted and effective recommendations to clients about how they should proceed.
“It's having a smarter way to maximize the utility of those tools,” Pryor added. “It's not, 'Here's a shiny new tech tool.' It's an extraction of the relevant data points, and here's our analysis on top of that.”
Why is it needed? The service allows for a “more extensive review across datasets that would be prohibitively large and costly to evaluate with human-led document review,” according to the firm.
It's also a response to client demand for quick turnarounds on data analysis complete with concise reports that make sense of the findings and outline clear paths forward. Pryor said: “We're really trying to hold lawyers' feet to the fire in trying to produce a succinct and robust set of recommendations.”
Bryan Cave began testing the service earlier this year in the U.K. with about 15 clients, including one on the Financial Times Stock Exchange 100 Index, and the feedback has been promising, Pryor said.
“We're working on having a fixed fee,” he added. “It will be very competitive.”
Competition: Pryor was unaware of any direct competition from other law firms that offer similar data analysis and consulting services in a single package, at least not in the U.K. But there are plenty of companies that specialize in e-discovery services, and those services seem to be getting more tailored to client needs. A few weeks ago, for instance, a new e-discovery company called Hanzo announced that it was using artificial intelligence to scour for social media posts, including hidden ones, to gather data for litigation.
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 AllNetflix Music Guru Becomes First GC of Startup Helping Independent Artists Monetize Catalogs
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Blockchain’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment Privacy Paradoxes
- 2Prior Written Notice: Calabrese v. City of Albany
- 3Learning From Experience: The Best and Worst of Years Past
- 4Treasury GC Returns to Davis Polk to Co-Chair White-Collar Defense and Investigations Practice
- 5Decision of the Day: JFK to Paris Stowaway's Bail Revocation Explained
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