Despite Appetite for Insights, Firms Still Struggle With Matter Profiling
Law firms and corporate legal departments want to better understand the matters that come across their desks, but eliciting insights from the data can require some major effort.
May 16, 2019 at 12:00 PM
3 minute read
If there's been on consistent theme at the Corporate Legal Operational Consortium 2019 Institute in Las Vegas, it's that properly organized data can open the door to all kinds of lucrative possibilities, from more-accurate case budgeting to effective litigation strategies.
Still, the “Using AI to Digitize Lawsuits to Perform Actionable Data Analytics” session at day two of the conference posited that despite the fact that there's a large appetite for such insights at law firms, there are a few obstacles standing in the way. Chief among them? Matter profiling is very difficult work.
Patrick DiDomenico, chief information officer at Ogletree Deakins, for example, noted that the process of structuring unstructured data being expensive and altogether mind-numbing work. Incentive is also an issue. Lawyers beginning work on a new matter may not have much data to work with and once they do, it's time to move onto another case.
“It's something that everyone wants but no one is willing to contribute to,” DiDomenico said.
Panelists compared the infrastructure necessary to effectively mine data for insights to a three-legged stool. A firm needs the right people, process and technology in place, a triumvirate that is oftentimes nonnegotiable. Without having a standardized process designed for data collection, for example, there's a chance that firms could inadvertently collect the wrong data pertaining to a matter.
“I've experienced deficiencies in all of these areas, and it can definitely be problematic,” DiDomenico said.
He also stressed the importance of having some kind of change management oversight established, since making changes to traditional workflow patterns tends to throw people out of whack. Indeed, while the human element may be a crucial part of the three-legged stool, it's also a potential vulnerability. Alan Bryan, senior associate general counsel at Walmart, said firms have to be mindful of their input process when collecting data.
“Because people and technology are combining on these processes you still have that element of human error,” Bryan said.
Nevertheless, all of the panelists agreed that the insights gained from structured data sets were worth the effort. From a corporate legal department perspective, Bryan pointed to performance-oriented metrics being useful in the course of an organization's ongoing relationship with outside counsel.
While the panel indicated that some people may find cold and hard statistics off-putting, Bryan said that law firms want the kind of feedback that was previously hard to articulate in quantifiable terms.
“It really helps you give the feedback you need to be giving to your law firms,” Bryan said.
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