What Does 2019 Hold for Legal AI?
What developments can we expect in the next year? Where and in what new ways will AI tools be deployed?
June 27, 2019 at 01:34 PM
5 minute read
The last five years have seen an explosion in the legal technology market. Across a range of industries, we have arrived at a point where deploying artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly the norm, and law is no exception. The number of firms and in-house teams now operating with some form of assistive AI technology is at an all-time high and it's only continuing to rise. Just as accountants no longer imagine life without excel, lawyers will soon be unable to imagine their day-to-day without AI.
2019 will bring a shift in the questions that are asked: it is no longer a case of whether this technology is beneficial, but which AI solutions, of the many now available, can best meet requirements. The year ahead will be one of significant progress.
So, why is this? Firstly, the capabilities of AI have notably progressed. We have now arrived at the fourth tier of machine learning, where the machine is able to make informed suggestions based on lawyers' interactions with documents—this is a clear step forward from the rigid, rules-based functions of older legal AI tools. Machines' capabilities will continue to improve over the next year, and the support offered to legal teams will continue to increase in sophistication. This sophistication is already visible in our evolution from previous technology solutions which introduced risk and compromise in the name of efficiency, as lawyers are now able to work faster without the previous downsides. Lawyers' confidence has increased and they are able to be more rigorous in their review, rather than rely on outdated methods like sampling.
Secondly, law firms and in-house counsel are now less reticent towards AI technology than they were a year ago, and this opens up significant opportunity for progress. The term 'AI' no longer carries unclear and futuristic connotations; most households now interact with AI daily through smartphones and other connected devices. This wider use and acceptance has led to a shift in perception across the legal industry; lawyers are now more open than ever to trialling the technology in a bid to improve the services they deliver to clients.
Implementation of AI products is also becoming easier. Lengthy deployment and training periods, which previously plagued legacy technology, are no longer cause for concern. New-era tools are much easier to use and understand. They are user-friendly, integrated seamlessly and adapt as lawyers use them. With lawyers notoriously time-poor, this removes a huge barrier to adoption.
Shifting Focus and Team Structure
All of these changes will have a notable impact on legal team structures, and the type of work both law firms and in-house lawyers carry out day-to-day. We will likely see a reduction in the size of teams allocated per project and a change to the overall focus of lawyers' work.
AI is also changing the type of work that lawyers are doing. Endless, mind-numbing and time-consuming tasks—such as due diligence and document review—take far less time with AI, or, in some cases, disappear completely. This means that junior lawyers and support staff, typically allocated such jobs, can now spend their time on more analytical and strategic work. This may mean fewer lawyers are needed per project or case, but it will have a positive impact on career progression and day-to-day experience.
We will also see wider changes in the legal market. The adoption of AI levels the playing field, opening up the market to smaller firms with fewer people, enabling them to bid for larger projects. So, to remain competitive in a crowded market, law firms and in-house counsel need to continue to view AI as an exciting enabler, rather than simply a box-ticking exercise. Staying ahead will be crucial.
However, we should remember that AI will never be able to compete with law firms or in-house counsel directly. It will never replace the years of expertise, experience and judgment of a lawyer. Technology should be seen to work seamlessly in tandem with the lawyers, surfacing relevant and pertinent information which the lawyer then decides to act on.
Final Thoughts
Law firms and in-house teams need to look at AI as an opportunity. Now six months in, 2019 is carving itself out to be the legacy year in which the industry took real steps to fully modernize, embracing technology to boost efficiency.
Machine learning platforms such as Luminance allow lawyers to remain productive, profitable and above all, competitive. Now that we've moved past suspicion and fear, the opportunities for the legal sector are enormous.
Firms and in-house teams now need to think carefully about their strategy, and the internal infrastructure needed to support successful technological innovation. Budgets, team expertise, training and selection of the right products are all key considerations. The issue should be top of leaders' agendas as the year progresses.
Emily Foges is CEO of Luminance. She has been scaling up technology-led businesses for over 20 years, working in M&A as a consultant and in-house with some of the UK's fastest growing businesses. She specialized in building business cases and then leading integration, when companies come together to become greater than the sum of their parts. The complexity of combining customers, products, platforms, teams and operations was the ideal training ground for turning a technology start-up into a global organization. Emily became CEO in 2016 when Luminance was a small team of technologists and lawyers. She took the product to market and led the growth of the business, which doubled in size every quarter throughout last year.
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 AllAI Disclosures Under the Spotlight: SEC Expectations for Year-End Filings
5 minute readA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readThree Legal Technology Trends That Can Maximize Legal Team Efficiency and Productivity
Trending Stories
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