Yesterday (July 21), Thomson Reuters announced that it added another generative AI  tool to Westlaw Precision with CoCounsel. The new tool, called Claims Explorer, will enable legal professionals to enter the facts of their case into the platform. Claims Explorer will then identify potential applicable claims or counterclaims. 

From experience, making sure you have know of and plead all applicable claims takes time and carries the risk of missing failing to plead good claims. While failing to plead one or more claims will not be fatal early in the lawsuit, it can lead to embarrassing requests to amend. These requests don’t make the lawyer look good to their client or even their adversary. Later in the litigation, it can be fatal if the claims become time-barred or leave to amend is denied. So this tool if it does what Thomson Reuters says, it can be quite valuable.

Finding claims with traditional research methods can be difficult and time-consuming

Why Claims Explorer

In making the announcement, Mike Dahn, head of Westlaw Product Management at Thomson Reuters, reiterated these points:  “Finding claims with traditional research methods can be difficult and time-consuming. Even experienced lawyers can miss applicable claims. Customers have told us about the difficulty of claims research for years, and it’s not just that it can take hours – it’s error-prone, which is easy to see in how often reputable firms attempt to add new claims or counterclaims later in the litigation, after the initial pleadings. But courts won’t always allow you to add a claim later, and missing the best claims can have significant consequences. It can mean the difference between winning or losing a motion, recovering more in damages or attorney’s fees, or potentially losing a case.” 

Thomson Reuters claims that the tool will do more than just identify claims. It will also suggest what claims are stronger, provide an idea of the burden of proof for the claims, whether attorney fees or extraordinary damages might be available based on a claim, and the like.

Dahn also provided some statistics backing up TR’s claims. “In our survey with attorneys about claims research, 69% reported taking cases they would have rejected had they fully understood the value of the claims, and 23% rejected new business based on a lack of a cause of action where they found later that a valid claim existed,” Dahn said.

Development of Claims Explorer

Dahn says that TR used not only AI tools but also attorney editors to develop the tool. “Claims Explorer solves significant research problems in a way that GenAI alone has trouble with…When we tried to solve claims research issues with AI alone, it didn’t work very well, so we had our attorney editors create new content about causes of action that enabled AI to work much better. “

Use Cases for Claims Explorer

I can’t, of course, vouch for how well the new Claims Explorer does what TR says it does. But I like the idea. Plaintiff lawyers, for example, need to get a quick handle on what claims a fact pattern might present and the viability of those claims. That kind of evaluation is critical when deciding whether to take a case on a contingent fee basis. Defendants can use the tool to examine the allegations being made to assess which ones are problematic and which ones are not.

Having said that, make no mistake. The responses of the Claims Explorer still have to be carefully evaluated by the lawyer. Whether a claim is viable depends not only on the law but primarily on the facts. That means a lawyer must still carefully ferret out the facts before using the tool. And new facts will always be uncovered as the case proceeds so the vitality of claims must still be updated constantly. 

The bottom line is that tools like Claims Explorer are a starting point, not an ending point, for a lawyer to evaluate claims

Moreover, the best lawyers are really good at fitting the facts into claims in new and sometimes unique ways. The bottom line is that tools like Claims Explorer are a starting point, not an ending point, for a lawyer to evaluate claims. It can be used to save time so that the lawyer can focus more on coming up with unique and new kinds of claims and assess where to focus their efforts. The danger with tools like this is that lazy lawyers will somehow conclude | their work is done once the tool kicks out a response.

But still, for better lawyers, this could be a time saver and help lawyers focus their expertise.