Technology Is Overpowering the Very Human Profession of Law
I saw an article about the increased use of artificial intelligence in the future of the practice of law. The article suggested that lawyers who are not technologically skilled ought to retire or consider another profession. Where is the practice of law headed?
June 08, 2017 at 05:37 AM
31 minute read
Technology is overpowering the very human profession of law.
I saw an article about the increased use of artificial intelligence in the future of the practice of law. The article suggested that lawyers who are not technologically skilled ought to retire or consider another profession. Where is the practice of law headed?
The article you referred to was published in the American Bar Association's Law Journal. It spoke of the coming future of artificial intelligence that can assist lawyers. It ended with the ominous statement that older lawyers who do not like or are not technologically advanced should look forward to their retirement or something to that effect.
Sometimes it is important just to stand still for a second, look at the nature of what the legal profession is supposed to be and then look at where and how technology has advanced the legal profession—or not advanced it. Clearly, since 1993 or 1994 forward, technology has radically changed the way law is practiced. The changes have resulted in the ability to have instant communication, the ability to forward large documents and materials, the ability to access and work at any place at any time and at any location as long as one carries a computer or laptop or even a smartphone. It has replaced the old running for a telephone booth during breaks in trials or looking for gas stations that had phone booths when traveling. For many lawyers and firms, it has replaced having a trusted secretary. It has reduced the number of office staff dramatically, though not necessarily for the better. It has equaled the playing field in terms of access to information. The days when big firm libraries had an advantage are gone as long as one can afford Lexis or Westlaw. Those programs can provide unlimited information almost instantaneously. It has changed the nature of trials. Trials now more and more are becoming technological shows. Documents are put up on a screen and reviewed by jurors. Even opening or closing speeches are all often shows of technology with photographs or evidence or written portions of the closing speech put before the jury. The counsel table in many courtrooms is filled with computer terminals and laptops. Instead of paper, many lawyers have everything on their computer and access it. Even oral arguments are different. Many judges have laptops or computers on the bench. Many arguments are spent watching judges type and oftentimes it's difficult to even see their faces. Filing documents now can be done instantaneously. There is no need to walk to the courthouse or run in at the last moment to have a filing meet the deadline. Discovery is often given on disk and with computers there is so much discovery sometimes that law firms have to hire special IT people to organize it.
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 AllMatt's Corner: Pa.R.D.E. 217—Obligations of a Formerly Admitted Attorney
2 minute readMatt's Corner: Contributory Negligence Can Be a Bar to Legal Malpractice Recovery
2 minute readMatt's Corner: RPC 8.4(d)—Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice
2 minute readTrending 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