It is no secret that legal analytics is changing the everyday practices of litigators. In recent years, dozens of commentators have published their own predictions on the ways in which technology will transform, disrupt, or revolutionize the legal industry. Even the American Bar Association has followed suit, modifying a lawyer’s duty of competence to include knowledge of substantive law as well as “the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.”
Legal analytics is not new. For hundreds of years, litigators have capitalized on the advantages of evidence-based decision making. This is, in fact, largely how the law works. Litigators serve their clients by using their legal reasoning skills to apply specific facts to particular laws. They do this by collecting evidence and by identifying the relevant statutes, cases, or rules that may support their case. For many years, this was a tedious and laborious process. However, recent innovations in legal technologies have expanded the depth and the breadth of legal research, allowing litigators to quickly mine, parse, synthesize, and utilize large bodies of public and private records.
If you haven’t heard of Trellis Legal Intelligence, Trellis.Law for short, we recommend you start paying attention. This legaltech startup is on fire! With more than $6M in funding and famed board member and venture capitalist, David O. Sacks on board, we’re expecting continued explosive growth for this company.
If you want to experience the most powerful legal research and analytics platform designed specifically for state court practitioners, we recommend you give this software a try. There are dozens of other platforms focused on federal practice, but we know of no other companies focused where most lawyers practice… State court!
“We didn’t meet by accident,” declares a billboard for the Pirnia Law Group on my commute down Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles. The city is awash with gigantic advertisements of this style, each hawking the services of local personal injury attorneys. At the office, newspaper headlines add to the day’s collage. A jury in Texas awards $352 million to a severely injured airline worker. Another in Iowa awards $97.4 million to a child and his family in a medical malpractice case.
According to recent reports, the post-pandemic era has ushered in some of the largest jury verdicts seen to date. Industry analysts warn us that nuclear verdicts are quickly becoming the norm, citing social inflation, generational shifts, and the coronavirus pandemic as causal factors. Although masks, large sums of money, and runaway juries make for an enticing read, I want to go back to those boulevard billboards. Most verdicts, after all, do not go nuclear. It’s the smaller claims, the routine personal injury cases, the ones that happen thousands of times a day, that have the largest impact on the litigation landscape. I want to know about those juries—the juries unimportant enough to notice.