#legaltech

Subscribe to #legaltech via RSS

If I had an hour to solve a problem, I’d spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and five minutes thinking about solutions. Albert Einstein

The ABA TechShow, which I had the honor of co-chairing this year, wrapped up on April 5, 2025, in Chicago, marking its 40th anniversary. The conference featured over 70 educational sessions, high-energy networking receptions, dozens of “lunch and learn” events, and even an 80s-themed anniversary party to commemorate four decades of innovation.Continue Reading ABA TechShow 2025: A Landmark Event That Highlights the Power of Team

Next week, I’m participating as a presenter in a unique legal conference. 
The conference is being put on by AffiniPay’s legal brands (AffiniPay is the parent company of  LawPay, MyCase,Docketwise and CASEpeer). It’s been billed as a live webinar. Unlike traditional conferences, this one blends in-person and virtual elements: the presenters will gather live in Austin, but attendees will tune in remotely.Continue Reading A Fresh Take on Legal Conferences: AffiniPay’s Virtual Legal Seminar 2025

As reported elsewhere, vLex, a legal research and database provider, recently announced significant enhancements to its AI tool, Vincent. These upgrades are designed to provide lawyers and legal professionals with enhanced practical solutions, address knowledge gaps, and offer valuable insights.

With the release, vLex is offering significant new workflows. The new features will be particularly helpful for litigators. What I like about the vLex products is that they seem to offer options in ways that can help litigators with real-world problems and improvements. The new enhancements seem to be consistent with this approach.Continue Reading Practical AI for Litigators: Vincent is Closing Knowledge Gaps

A new study from the Blickstein Group reveals some disturbing trends for law firms that represent businesses, particularly large ones. The Study is entitled Legal Service Delivery in the Age of AI. The Study was done jointly by FTI Technologies, a consulting group, and Blickstein. It looks at law department legal operations.Continue Reading GenAI, Legal Ops, and The Future of Law Firms: A Wake-Up Call?

“Bad news is a headline, and gradual improvement is not.”
Bill Gates

All too often, those of us in the legal tech writing community report on things that won’t happen but should, things that aren’t being adopted but should be, or things that are outright failures. This tendency is particularly true when it comes to access to justice issues. We often cite the failure of technology to make any dent in the problem.

Granted, we have a serious access to justice gap that may get worse before it gets better.

But as I have written before, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about the good things that are going on that do impact access to justice for the underprivileged and, for that matter, everyone. I recently wrote about New York City’s use of AI to help people in various small and doable ways. I recently came across another tool called descrybe.ai that is doing the same.Continue Reading descrybe.ai: Bridging the Access to Justice Gap One Piece at a Time With Democratized Legal Information

As most of you know, I covered the world’s largest consumer products show, CES, in early January for Above the Law. I offered various stories on what I thought was important from a legal standpoint, which you can find here.

One thing I didn’t mention in my coverage was quantum computing. CES offered some 3 hours of presentations on quantum computing. I didn’t write on it. It’s because a), like most of you, I don’t really understand it, and b) I’m not sure what it can and can’t do for legal that’s different than what we have now. The second question begs the question about its impact on lawyers and legal.

Recent DevelopmentsContinue Reading Quantum Computing: It Giveth. But May Taketh Away

We have all heard over and over again about lawyers who use Gen AI and fail to check the citations the tools provide. The dangers of hallucinations and inaccuracies when using Gen AI tools are well known, and a Court will likely have little sympathy for the lawyer who fails to check sources.

But what if an expert witness uses Gen AI to come up with nonexistent citations to support their declarations or testimony?

That very thing just happened in a case pending in Minnesota federal court, as reported by Luis Rijo in an article in PPC Land. Ironically, the expert in question, Professor Jeff Hancock, the Stanford Social Media Lab Director, offered a declaration in a case challenging the validity of a Minnesota statute regulating deepfake content in political campaigns. Hancock subsequently admitted using ChatGPT to help draft his declaration. The declaration included two citations to nonexistent academic articles and incorrectly attributed the authors in another citation.Continue Reading Did Your Expert Use ChatGPT? You Might Want to Ask