Legal.io Tries Consumer-Friendly AI for Access to Justice Effort
Legal.io's LARA uses AI to understand legal questions from the average person.
November 28, 2017 at 10:32 AM
6 minute read
Over the past year, legal technologists concerned with access to justice have increasingly focused on the importance of the interface in bringing legal resources to under-resourced communities. Chatbots like DoNotPay leverage instant message like chat to help people access legal content, while others like CuroLegal have tried to beef up simple guided interview interfaces to provide information.
Legal network service provider Legal.io is concerned with these same interface questions for its new legal assistant tool, LARA. Using machine learning, the tool interprets both voice and text language an average person might use to ask a legal question, then suggests relevant data from Legal.io's resources.
Pieter Gunst, chief operating officer at Legal.io, said the company took note of the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure in legal enterprise technology and looked for an opportunity to apply it to the company's consumer base.
“We're more focused on what these tools can actually do for consumers in terms of navigating the legal system,” he said.
At present, LARA has a couple core functionalities. It primarily produces non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) by taking relevant information in by voice or text. Its other functions—finding an attorney and pro bono services—are still “mostly experimental,” according to LARA's website. Gunst noted that Legal.io is currently working on ways to delimit the kinds of information LARA can draw from so that the company's bar association partners can use the tool in more regional or practice-specific ways.
NDAs are a popular starting point for organizations looking to build out broad document generators. LISA, another female-named document preparation tool designed by Chrissie Lightfoot, president of EntrepreneurLawyer, and Adam Duthie, partner at Duthie & Co., also used NDAs as a foothold into a broader development of document creation tools.
Although technologists tend to tout their use of one or two core technologies, Gunst noted that effective strategies tend to pull from lots of different technology structures. “What we've found is to get a useful response, you're kind of using a combination of technologies. You're using search, you're using a part of a document generator,” he noted.
LARA currently can take inquiries via chat, Facebook Messenger and voice, but Gunst noted that the Legal.io team is paying close attention to the ways in which LARA users feel most comfortable accessing their information and experimenting with some new interfaces.
“You're likely to see some of that in LARA later. We're experimenting with what is the preferred way for a consumer to use this,” he said.
While the Legal.io team is working to create interface access points for users, as with any of these tools, machine comprehension isn't always totally there. My LARA inquiries for a local immigration attorney sometimes put me in the wrong state, or occasionally produced no attorneys at all. But, also like any of these tools, the machine learning insight of the tool can sometimes take some time to build.
Legal.io has that long-game in mind, with Gunst saying, “In our minds, it's an experiment around what's possible.”
Over the past year, legal technologists concerned with access to justice have increasingly focused on the importance of the interface in bringing legal resources to under-resourced communities. Chatbots like DoNotPay leverage instant message like chat to help people access legal content, while others like CuroLegal have tried to beef up simple guided interview interfaces to provide information.
Legal network service provider Legal.io is concerned with these same interface questions for its new legal assistant tool, LARA. Using machine learning, the tool interprets both voice and text language an average person might use to ask a legal question, then suggests relevant data from Legal.io's resources.
Pieter Gunst, chief operating officer at Legal.io, said the company took note of the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure in legal enterprise technology and looked for an opportunity to apply it to the company's consumer base.
“We're more focused on what these tools can actually do for consumers in terms of navigating the legal system,” he said.
At present, LARA has a couple core functionalities. It primarily produces non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) by taking relevant information in by voice or text. Its other functions—finding an attorney and pro bono services—are still “mostly experimental,” according to LARA's website. Gunst noted that Legal.io is currently working on ways to delimit the kinds of information LARA can draw from so that the company's bar association partners can use the tool in more regional or practice-specific ways.
NDAs are a popular starting point for organizations looking to build out broad document generators. LISA, another female-named document preparation tool designed by Chrissie Lightfoot, president of EntrepreneurLawyer, and Adam Duthie, partner at Duthie & Co., also used NDAs as a foothold into a broader development of document creation tools.
Although technologists tend to tout their use of one or two core technologies, Gunst noted that effective strategies tend to pull from lots of different technology structures. “What we've found is to get a useful response, you're kind of using a combination of technologies. You're using search, you're using a part of a document generator,” he noted.
LARA currently can take inquiries via chat, Facebook Messenger and voice, but Gunst noted that the Legal.io team is paying close attention to the ways in which LARA users feel most comfortable accessing their information and experimenting with some new interfaces.
“You're likely to see some of that in LARA later. We're experimenting with what is the preferred way for a consumer to use this,” he said.
While the Legal.io team is working to create interface access points for users, as with any of these tools, machine comprehension isn't always totally there. My LARA inquiries for a local immigration attorney sometimes put me in the wrong state, or occasionally produced no attorneys at all. But, also like any of these tools, the machine learning insight of the tool can sometimes take some time to build.
Legal.io has that long-game in mind, with Gunst saying, “In our minds, it's an experiment around what's possible.”
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1What Qualities Will Distinguish Good from Great Service In 2025?
- 2The Met Hires GC of Elite University as Next Legal Chief
- 3Not Here: Court Finds Texas Has No Jurisdiction Over Google
- 4Lawyer's Retirement Benefits Excluded From Marital Property
- 5'David and Goliath' Dispute Between Software Developers Ends in $24M Settlement
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