2020 Outlook: How Technological Advances Are Changing the Legal Landscape
Now we're discussing the effects of "smart" technology and social media. While it has always influenced our profession, technological progress is having a greater impact now than ever before.
December 31, 2019 at 10:28 AM
5 minute read
Technology has unquestionably had an exponential effect on the legal industry. Every year, attorneys discuss how technology has transformed the practice of law. It was not long ago that we discussed the shift from paper to computers. Now we're discussing the effects of "smart" technology and social media. While it has always influenced our profession, technological progress is having a greater impact now than ever before.
Technology has the power to save lives. Driverless vehicles, intelligent robotics in medicine and science and many other technologically advanced products reduce the rate of human error that in turn reduces injuries and lost lives. This is of course a welcomed change, and companies implementing these advancements should be applauded so long as they do so methodically and in a manner that keeps the public's safety the foremost priority. Yet, despite these significant advances, error will unfortunately not completely disappear. Catastrophic personal injury and wrongful death litigation will continue, but, as will be the case in many areas of the law, the frequency and types of cases will change.
Car crashes caused by human distraction or mistake, for example, will give way to incidents where driver-assist "smart" technology fails. As a result, certain car crash cases (which in some instances in Florida come with a rebuttable presumption of negligence) will be replaced by complicated and expensive products liability actions involving seemingly unforeseen questions as to liability and causation. While these changes may seem beyond the horizon, in recent years we've already witnessed car crashes involving driverless technology, some of which have tragically resulted in catastrophic injuries and even fatalities. We've also already seen advancements in robotic equipment affecting medical-related litigation and internet privacy and security issues impacting class actions. Technology is undeniably affecting the litigation landscape, and we therefore must prepare for these changes and adapt our practices of law.
These same technological advancements have also revolutionized how attorneys work, litigate and manage. In recent years, law firms have turned to cloud based software and case management systems and have automated case flow and deadline management. Offices have gone paperless. Law firms have implemented "virtual" meetings with staff and clients. We now can connect anytime, anywhere, from any device, with anyone in the world. We can accomplish nearly any task from any location at any time. We review transcripts on sophisticated computer programs which allow the user to edit and share notes effortlessly with colleagues. Terabytes of data are analyzed, in a matter of minutes, by incredibly advanced e-discovery tools which offer analytics that seemed impossible just a decade ago.
Thus, it comes as no surprise that technology has also altered the course of litigation itself. Smart phones, smart cars, smart watches, smart houses, and smart towns have given us access to an incredible amount of information. Juries now frequently watch surveillance footage of the incidents at issue because of the increased prevalence of cameras. Highly complex injuries, medical procedures and financial damages are explained in courtrooms through computerized illustrations and animations that are phenomenally spectacular and instructive. And, the advent and rampant use of social media has fundamentally changed the jury selection process. We now know incredibly detailed information about our jurors before they even speak one word in the courtroom.
Yet, as we prepare to enter the new year, we need to also recognize the various obstacles and potential dangers technology presents. As we become more familiar with and reliant upon technology, we risk losing certain vital skills. If we too often hide behind computer screens, text messages, animations and PowerPoint presentations, we risk losing the ability to engage and connect with colleagues, jurors, witnesses, judges and most importantly, our clients. Technology can be extremely compelling and informative, but it simply cannot replace the impact of a captivating orator making a persuasive and enthralling argument.
Perhaps most importantly, technological advancement has changed us as attorneys and people. Our clients need us … to consult, navigate, guide, protect, and seek justice. Technology threatens us with information overload. We've become physically addicted to our phones, computers and emails. Our dependence on these devises distracts us from our most important priorities. There is no question that our clients are harmed if we allow technology to increase stress, anxiety and disorder, and that is a real danger.
In 2020, and the years to follow, we as a profession face an increasingly difficult challenge to learn how best to utilize technology, which in so many ways makes us better, without allowing it to distract, overwhelm and undermine us.
Michael Hersh and Kimberly Wald are attorneys at Kelley | Uustal, a Fort Lauderdale law firm focusing on catastrophic injury and wrongful death. Contact Hersh at [email protected] and Wald at [email protected].
|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 AllNavigating Claims Under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and Florida Telemarketing Act
4 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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