Pittsburgh AI Startup Promises to Boost Law Firm Margins
Pittsburgh-based LegalSifter says its contract reading technology can be "a revenue expander" for outside counsel.
December 20, 2017 at 05:14 PM
4 minute read
Kevin Miller, CEO of LegalSifter.
Amid the ever-growing buzz about artificial intelligence in the legal industry, a Pittsburgh-based startup recently announced its first “combined intelligence” partnership with a law firm—with more deals likely to follow.
LegalSifter, founded by two Carnegie Mellon University alums who received seed funding from the school in 2014, offers software that reads contracts and then gives advice about them. The person viewing that advice could be an executive, a company lawyer, or even outside counsel, said LegalSifter CEO Kevin Miller.
After a contract is uploaded, Miller said, it takes about 10 to 20 seconds to read the document and decide what elements are present. Then the software highlights key concepts and offers advice on how to approach them. That's where the “combined” part comes in—the advice can be tailored to the user and supplemented with lawyer guidance.
For instance, if the software detects an assignment clause, it will show the client company's typical stance on assignment clauses. When the tool is in its non-customized state, LegalSifter provides some best-practices text so users aren't starting from scratch, Miller said, but that can be changed to reflect a particular lawyer's advice or a client's policy.
The software lowers risk for companies that use it, Miller said. “Lots and lots of nonlawyers are negotiating contracts because they can't afford to wait for outside counsel” during a negotiation, he said.
And for law firms, LegalSifter says it offers an opportunity to widen profit margins, particularly when working on a fixed-fee or alternative-fee basis.
“A lawyer that uses this product is faster, materially so, and makes fewer mistakes,” Miller said. “It's a revenue expander and it's a margin expander, and it also allows the law firm to get stickier with the client because they're selling subscriptions” to the software.
He added that LegalSifter also creates a way for senior attorneys to provide junior lawyers with guidance as they evaluate contracts from afar, by loading the software with their own best practices for others in their firm to consult.
Earlier this month, LegalSifter announced a partnership with U.K. law firm TLT LLP. And at the beginning of 2018, the company expects to officially announce a similar partnership with Horty Springer & Mattern, a boutique firm based in Pittsburgh. Several other law firms have signed seller agreements that will become public next year as well, Miller said.
Dan Mulholland, a senior partner at Horty Springer, said his firm learned about LegalSifter early in 2017, somewhat by accident. Mulholland said he was looking for an e-discovery vendor when he came across the startup, but he was intrigued by the idea.
Horty Springer, a 16-lawyer firm, provides full-service legal counsel to health systems and hospitals, so much of their practice involves contract review.
“We found it a very useful tool that we could review a contract, redline it and in a matter of minutes send it back to the client,” Mulholland said. “Whatever time we're devoting into it now will be recouped many-fold because of the efficiencies it gives us.”
Mulholland said his firm plans to let clients use the software on their own, customize it based on their business, or use the software with simultaneous added guidance from a lawyer. He noted that his firm has been using fixed-fee arrangements for more than 30 years, and the software will be all the more useful in that respect.
“A lot of people think this artificial intelligence development is going to eliminate lawyers, I think it's going to create a lot of opportunities for law firms,” Mulholland said. “This gives us a very efficient way to service clients on a fixed fee.”
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 AllWho Got the Work: Morgan Lewis Set to Defend X Corp., Elon Musk in ERISA Suit
Federal Judge Sides With Lyft Driver in Contractual Dispute Over $1M Uninsured Motorist Coverage
5 minute readPa. Justices to Mull 'Special-Notice' Rule Elevating Standards for Enforcing Online Binding Arbitration Agreements
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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