The IT crowd
Technology occupies a curious space in the legal community. On one hand, City law firms fall over themselves to appear forward-thinking in relation to technology and lawyers have generally been eager to hop on the social media bandwagon. Likewise, lawyers became addicted to mobile gadgets years ago, with the BlackBerry quickly winning the profession's heart, even if a few are now casting lustful glances in Apple's direction. But in many ways, the debate regarding technology for law firms as businesses has become ghettoised over the last 10 years. In the late 1990s, when the first tech-boom was in full effect and the IT-fuelled predictions of Richard Susskind were inspiring and irritating in equal measure, the topic was much on the mind of managing partners. At the time many firms were throwing money at IT, in some cases with little to show for it.
September 29, 2010 at 07:19 PM
3 minute read
Will legal tech break out of its ghetto once more?
Technology occupies a curious space in the legal community. On one hand, City law firms fall over themselves to appear forward-thinking in relation to technology and lawyers have generally been eager to hop on the social media bandwagon. Likewise, lawyers became addicted to mobile gadgets years ago, with the BlackBerry quickly winning the profession's heart, even if a few are now casting lustful glances in Apple's direction.
But in many ways, the debate regarding technology for law firms as businesses has become ghettoised over the last 10 years. In the late 1990s, when the first tech-boom was in full effect and the IT-fuelled predictions of Richard Susskind were inspiring and irritating in equal measure, the topic was much on the mind of managing partners. At the time many firms were throwing money at IT, in some cases with little to show for it.
Over the years the efforts of technology vendors perhaps became counter-productive as they responded to the flash of interest by bombarding law firms with far more jargon-ladled announcements than the average partner could keep up with. It's an interesting contrast with what happened in consumer IT. The last decade has seen companies like Apple and Research In Motion (the latter this week launching its much-touted iPad competitor) crack the formula to make personal tech desirable, sexy even. The use of business technology, on the other hand, became regarded as something that never lived up to its promise or was a plain threat – a disruptive technology.
At some point, the profession must once more engage with institutional technology. And this looks a timely moment, if for no other reason than legal service liberalisation and alternative business structures will be closely linked to it. The adoption of internet-based computing systems, arguably the biggest shake-up in institutional IT for decades, could be another factor. A more subtle shift, which is alluded to in Legal Week Intelligence's upcoming Information Technology Report (ITR), is that staff satisfaction with IT has improved even as spending has been pared back over the last two years. By consensus, the vanity projects and white elephants of the first boom of law firm IT are a thing of the past. Law firms have increasingly brought in expertise by hiring chief information officers from outside the profession and IT teams have become better at delivering.
With firms once more moving into the investment phase it seems that technology will come to the fore. Indeed, the number of partners responding to the ITR has risen substantially in recent years. There is also the fact that associates uniformly think IT is more important than partners do. Tragically for law firm leaders – and journalists – separating the game-changing from the time-wasting will involve negotiating a ticket of techno-babble.
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 AllSpanish Firm Continues Geographical Diversification With Latest Partner Appointments
MoFo Replenishes Singapore Corporate Partner Loss as Lawyer Returns From Gibson Dunn
Trending Stories
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