Technology Is Necessary to Serve Client Needs
Technology can be the key, but lawyers need to see it as an important part of solving the client's issue.
June 14, 2015 at 07:28 PM
4 minute read
You can't hide from technology any longer. The world has changed, and it's not going back to the “good old days.” Electronic data is everywhere, and when it comes to the legal industry that's where you find the facts. A lawyer that has a command of the facts has a great advantage over a lawyer that does not. Technology has become necessary, not optional, condition of serving a client's needs. Whether investigations, litigations or regulatory inquiries, you still need to know what the facts are and oftentimes the facts lie in the electronic data, which is data residing in a computer. (Just for clarity I don't mean physically in the computer; I mean electronically).
Place this against a backdrop of a near global meltdown and recession that changed the legal industry forever. Now more than ever, clients are holding law firms accountable for their outcomes and for the value received from their services. In my meetings with some of the top tier law firms, I often hear the concern around how partners can differentiate themselves to the client. I've heard stories where the client says, “If some other top tier firm can do it cheaper, I might as well go with them as you're all smart people.” This doesn't seem to be a set of isolated incidents. Major clients are re-negotiating rates with their law firms and using their buying power and the threat of taking their business elsewhere to bring down legal costs. So how can a law firm deal with such an uncertain, pressure-filled environment?
It seems to me that it's all about leveraging the intellectual horsepower of the lawyers and the firm. Leverage is key here, and technology is how you leverage it. We've all heard the old adage, “Work smarter, not harder.” In this case, it's even more relevant than ever. With technology, it's now possible to help a human perform a task at 10 to sometimes 100 times the speed of doing it manually. No matter how hard you work, you will never beat a human and a machine working together. Have you ever tried to race someone on a bike when you're on foot? I have, and I'm a pretty decent runner. The bike wins every time. Leverage is the key to winning in this economy, and technology is what gives you this power.
This content has been archived.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 AllTrending 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