How Blockchain, AI Can Change the Practice of Law
Artificial intelligence and blockchain are the wave of the future for law firms, said a panel at the Clio Cloud Conference.
October 04, 2018 at 05:21 PM
3 minute read
The sixth annual Clio Cloud Conference held a talk with lawyers about how artificial intelligence and blockchain-based technologies can be used by firms of various sizes to become more cost and time efficient.
Dat Nguyen, a former Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy attorney who is now vice president of special projects at blockchain startup Sagewise, said blockchain technology can transform how lawyers verify e-signatures.
He noted that e-signatures can be difficult to authenticate because you're only given a receipt that lists an IP address and a date. That isn't secure, specifically in the legal field where contesting the accuracy of an e-signature can be costly, he added.
But using blockchain, Nguyen explained, can provide a hash at the time of signing that “mathematically proves it is unique to that document” and serves as a unique fingerprint. Document tampering and forgery could then become a thing of the past, he added.
In addition to blockchain, Casetext CEO Jake Heller noted that AI can be used in outsourcing low-level cognitive legal functions that can free up lawyers to spend more time on higher cognitive issues. Low-level work, he explained, are the manual processes that clients don't want to pay for and that can be easily automated.
Heller surmised that outsourcing some of that work to AI programs may help to lower law firm prices or provide a better way to predict how much a lawyer will charge. He cited as an example Kira, an AI-powered program that shifts through thousands of contracts for due diligence projects to find clauses that law firms view as potentially dangerous, a task that would take a lawyer much longer to find.
Heller predicted the future of law practice will be faster and more affordable and provide better outcomes for lawyers.
“If you can take certain aspects of your practice that bore you, that clients aren't paying for and that is making your practice more expensive, such as e-discovery, legal research, contract review, and use AI, you can pass [those] savings and predictability on to your clients,” he explained. “That's a big deal for clients.”
He added that since lawyers don't spend time on lower-level tasks, they can do what they are meant to do: high-level legal work. “You bring a unique amount of intelligence and intuition to every single case, that's the part you should be focused on,” he said. “Artificial intelligence allows you to focus more on that.”
A legal trends report presented by Clio found that the mass market of law firms, which are smaller than midsize and Big Law firms, could possibly automate and provide more automated lawyering as a way to reach and bill more clients.
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
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