According to recent studies, law firms have an AI problem on both sides of the business.

Not only are they slow to use AI and automation to serve clients as demonstrated by a recent Deloitte Legal study, but according to a new BigHand study, they’re also failing to use it to run their practices. Poor management of support staff and workflow not only impacts the lawyers and legal professionals, it also directly impacts client service and satisfaction. Clients that are more and more demanding better and cheaper results.

If firms want to keep business, they need to figure out how to use AI and automation acroass the board.

Here are my thoughts for Above the Law

Deloitte Legal’s new survey reveals the continuing gap between what legal departments want and expect from outside counsel when it comes to AI and what they are getting. 

Legal departments will be insourcing more and demanding lower fees from law firms.And alternative ways to price and value legal services in the age of AI. Billable hours and leverage, the mainstays of law firm revenue may no longer supply the riches many firms have enjoyed. 

And law firms are not ready for the “seismic” change that’s about to occur.

Here is my post for Above the Law

On of my favorite legal tech conferences is put on by American Association of Law Libraries and kicks off Saturday in Cleveland. This year’s theme focuses on leading with Aloha: leading with empathy, collaboration, and integrity in challenging world. There’s plenty of Aloha type sessions and lots of practical content as well. Here’s my take for Above the Law going in. #AALL26

If you (or your client) thinks what is said to a chatbot is private, think again. Under the Stored Communications Act, the government can get a search warrant and force the AI provider to produce your AI conversations. And there is not a damn thing you can do about it. Whatever you say to AI can and will be used against you. Here’s my post for Above the Law on a recent case.

Here’s my recent post on Above the Law on fractional GCs. It can be a solution for businesses that don’t need and can’t justify full time in house counsel.  And for lawyers with judgment and experience and who can use AI effectively, it’s an attractive option. A potential win-win. 



It goes without saying that our court reporting systems is in crisis. There is a shortage of qualified reporters, on the one hand, and a demand to use technology to create transcripts cheaper and faster on the other. Perhaps we need new ways of thinking about the role to preserve the value court reporters bring. Here is my piece for Above the Law

New Thomson Reuters survey confirms what has long been the case. In-house counsel want better use of technology and innovation from their outside counsel, but don’t seem to be demanding it. Here’s my thoughts for Above the Law on the survey and a look at why in-house counsel aren’t more demanding. 

Here’s my post for Above the Law on Thomson Reuters‘ announcement of a rebuilt CoCounsel AI tool.It marks a pivot to what TR calls a fiduciary grade AI for complex and specilized legal matters. Matters where precision and verification are critical. It also suggested a subtle shift in approach in a presentation that was remarkable in various ways.