My people are destroyed from a lack of knowledge. Hosea 4:6.
As we close out 2022, it’s customary to look back and highlight the most noteworthy events or discuss all the things we are thankful for during the year.
While I have a lot of things to be thankful for, I want to focus on what we have to be most grateful for from a legal tech standpoint. Looking back at 2022, what had the most significant positive impact on legal? And its data. What can data do for lawyers? What it can show us. Information we never had before.
There’s lots of talk about AI and machine learning and how those tools will or will not impact the practice of law.
This past Sunday, I decided I wanted a small tabletop Christmas tree for my office. After all, ’tis the season. I went online and was immediately faced with a confusing and irritating search (Tabletop Christmas trees not readily indexed on several sites). But, I finally found one at a big box store nearby. I could get it delivered by Monday afternoon, but what the hell, I could also drive over and big it up immediately, right? Wrong.
While lots of states endlessly debate what to do about A2J and contemplate their navels, Alaska has actually done something that might just move the needle.
Several articles and surveys that have come out recently suggest a looming donnybrook in 2023 between law firms and business clients. The law firms want to aggressively raise rates but their business clients claim to be outraged by such efforts. These clients also say they plan to resist such efforts aggressively.
In the article, Moren talks about how several well-known tech companies have pivoted even when they seemingly were on the top of their game. By pivoting sooner rather than later, these companies set themselves up for survival. And even greater success in a changing world. Says Moren, “Where once they might have ruled the world by producing the thing that everybody needed to have—whether it was a hardware product or a crucial piece of software—they seem to eventually evolve into a new form, one where they’re focused less on delivering a key product and more on what service they provide.”
I just finished reading James Patterson’s book, 
Several years ago, I was engaged by an insurance carrier to defend many of its insureds in some repetitive litigation across the nation. At one point, the VP of Claims to whom I reported and I were asked to brief the carrier’s VP of subrogation on the litigation. The subrogation unit was exploring whether any recovery actions could be brought against those arguably responsible for the losses and costs. (In most insurance companies, pursuing third party claims is the responsibility of a separate subrogation unit).
Everyone is talking about the recent