E-Discovery in the Year 2048: What the Future Holds
A Legalweek panel painted a picture of the future of legal that is more machine than human, where automation is key but the work never ends.
February 01, 2018 at 02:28 PM
4 minute read
What the future holds for legal professionals may be anyone's guess. But for speakers at the “A Day in the Life of a Futurist Jurist Empowered by Artificial Intelligence: An Ethical Dilemma” Legalweek 2018 session, examining changes that already afoot in the industry can offer some telling clues.
From artificial intelligence to automation and remote work, there here are three most significant predictions from the panel:
Fewer Human Members on Your Review Team
Ralph Losey, principal at Jackson Lewis sees the future as one where e-discovery review teams are more machine than human.
The reason? Advancement in artificial intelligence (AI) that is, for now, just a far off idea: “An algorithm computer, or bot that knows the law, knows every opinion, and not only that, but knows what the relevant information is for a particular dispute,” Losey said.
Still, though such a machine could replace the expertise of a lawyer on a review team, it wouldn't be able to handle e-discovery entirely on its own. “There would be still humans involved, and one of them would be the project manager,” Losey added.
While an AI program that is all-knowing in law seems far off, Losey noted that there are already some inroads being made toward this goal. “Look at what is already happening with traffic tickets … there's a traffic ticket bot that makes appeals, and it's already overturned tens of thousands of traffic tickets.”
A Meshing of Work and Personal Life
The mixing of work and personal life is one prediction that the session's speakers believe is already coming to fruition. “The separation between work and personal life has really started to blur in the past 10 years, and we think it will be accelerating,” Losey said.
Martin Tully, litigation partner at Akerman, noted that such “blurring” is spurred in no small part by the computer devices attorneys and other professionals carry on them at all times. He asked, “Is there a personal life when [smartphones] stay with you 24/7?”
The geographical and physical boundaries that separate work and personal life are also beginning to break down with the move toward remote work in the legal sphere, a trend that many believe will only become more pronounced in the years to come. Losey, for example, can see a time when attorneys working at a law firm will have “never been in its office.”
AI Will Bring Near-Total Automation to E-Discovery
Shannon Capone Kirk, e-discovery counsel at Ropes & Gray, believes that the e-discovery process “will be greatly approved with less fighting in the future” because of two important potential changes.
The first is the advancement of information governance technology “so that when data is created, it automatically gets sorted into the right buckets” and it is managed by other automated “information controls.” The second, she added, is “improvements in technology-assisted review” that will make it fairly simple and seamless to find all relevant documents within a data set.
Some, however, are skeptical as to whether such changes can come to fruition. Tully, for example, noted that many current technology professionals call such advancements in information governance a “mythical unicorn of auto classification,” believing it is difficult to develop, given “the various amount of data types and sources being created.”
But Losey can see a day where e-discovery happens without attorneys, instead of being done by AI and a team “with special training that knows how to work with the AI to find the relevant information from all parties. And they [find relevant information] equally, because they don't care” about the outcome of the review.
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
- 1The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
- 2Bosworth Claims It Was Kline & Specter, Not Him, That Breached Settlement Terms
- 3K&L Gates Faces Malpractice Suit: 'An Experienced Labor Attorney Would Know'
- 4Announcing Women Attorneys of the Year 2024
- 5Judge Approves $667K Settlement Against Independence Blue Cross for Unpaid, Pre-Shift Computer Work
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