I recently attended LexSummit2024, the Filevine user conference. Filevine is a case management software provider. I also got a demo of vLex’s enhancement of its AI tool, Vincent from its Chief Strategy Officer, Ed Walters. VLex has historically been thought of as a legal research provider although now we its expansion, Walters describes vLex as a “legal intelligence company.” Lots of cool stuff, most of which is already out there in the marketplace. What struck me the most about these and other tools? Litigation is about to be completely disrupted across the board.
The Filevine Products: Depo copilot
One of the more remarkable and game changing products announced at the Filevine conference was Depo copilot. (FYI, Depo copilot is not a Microsoft product but one developed solely by Filevine). You load the program on your laptop or tablet, give it your goals, describe the relevant facts, etc. Then at the depo, the product will create a real time transcript you can refer to as you ask questions. Sounds ok, but there’s more. It can suggest questions based on your goals. It can highlight inconsistencies In testimony real time. It can find previous testimony in the depo and pull it up. It can highlight vague and incorrect answers. It can even tell you if you ask an ambiguous question.
I took a lot of depos in which I asked a lot of what I thought were really good questions. Or I would think I got great answers only to find out when I read the transcriot either the question or the answer was far from what I remembered. Being able to clean up questions or answers on the spot? Wow. Also, having help finding inconsistencies and answering questions would make for such a better deposition. It was rare for my client to be willing to pay to have another lawyer or legal professional present to do these kinds of things. Even if I could have a second chair there, the output would depended on how good, rested, and interested that person was.
Agent AI
Another product announced at LexSummit is called Filevine Futurists Agent AI. This is an adaptable AI tool developed first for immigration but recently applied to complex litigation matters. Agent AI can automate demand letters, create fact statements, and create responses to demand letters. It can even create a litigation plan containing a budget, timelines, plans, and the like. It can take videos and images, de-dup them, and create maps showing where people were and when. You basically upload examples of previous documents you need, and the tool can take those to create a draft in your voice.
I did a lot of mass tort defense work in my career. This kind of tool would have been so valuable in responding to multiple claims. It would be so valuable to create a lit plan in any case that could be reviewed with the client and get a sign-off. My cases often had a massive number of photos and videos. Being able to distill those, get rid of the duplicates, and then use those to map and document various things would be invaluable. Having these images and documents available for my experts would have saved my clients millions.
Vincent AI
Ed Walters demoed the significant vLex AI enhancement for me. VLex is primarily known as a legal research provider, but it’s now doing so much more. Walters showed some 15 new workflows that vLex had developed. One of the beauties of what vLex is doing is that it creates a good prompt based on what the lawyers asks. For litigation matters, vLex used a team of human litigators (yes, I know, some might consider that an oxymoron) to determine what most litigators really want to know when they ask certain questions. Vincent then uses this training to interpret your question and prepare a prompt that is most likely to get a valid response. For example, Walter asked Vincent about the strengths of a certain well known litigator. It spit out a response listing all the cases in which the lawyer was involved, the result, the client and a description of what people consider his strengths.
Another new workflow does the same for judges. Vincent can now take internal documents in partnership with a document management service and provide confidential and safe answers to inquiries based on that internal data (will be available soon, according to Walters). Vincent also now has contract management tools, improved 50 state survey capability, compare and summarize documents capability, and analyze and redline contracts workflow.On the litigation side, Vincent can now analyze complaints, depositors and pleadings. It can explore a collection of documents, do a 50 state survey, find related authorities, do a redline analysis, and compare documents. A more comprehensive summary of the enhancements can be found here.
What Does All This Mean For Litigation?
I recently wrote an article about what the future of litigation will look like. I questioned whether the amount of litigation in the future may decline due to technology like Gen AI that could indirectly reduce disputes or enhance settlements.
Tools like those described above will certainly generate better results. But they will also drive down litigation costs
That may be true but I think there is more to the story. Certainly, litigation will change. Tools like those described above will certainly generate better results. But they will also drive down litigation costs, perhaps by a lot. This reduction together with the advent of litigation finance, means more cases. There are lots of claims that are never brought or settled too low because one of the parties simply can’t afford the cost. These tools could reduce the cost factor and allow more focus on the merits.
We don’t try many cases anymore. That’s a problem
As I have written here and here, as a profession, we don’t try many cases anymore. That’s a problem because how we evaluate exposure should be based on what a jury verdict would likely be. But if there are few or no verdicts on which to base our evaluations, we can’t evaluate exposure based on the most critical factor. The main reason we try fewer cases? Cost. Cost of discovery. Cost of experts. Cost of the lawyers. Cost of the trial. Cases settle every day for more or less than they should due to costs. Ask any in-house counsels whether they settle cases for more than the exposure due to costs.
The other factor: risk. Being able to evaluate the risk based on valid data. Like what the judge is like to do. What your adversary will likely do, their experience level. All things that in the past were just too expensive to obtain.
Tools like those offered by Filevine and vLex help solve both problems. They reduce costs and enable better risk calculations. The net effect may be more trials, which we desperately need.
More cases, more trials. That doesn’t sound like litigation is going away.
There is another disruption these tools can create. The tools enable lawyers from smaller firms with less well-heeled clients to level the playing field. To go toe to toe with the big boys. That’s a good thing since it is fairer. And fairness should be the bedrock of our profession. The tools may also encourage lawyers to look at smaller firms that use these tools.
Associate Training
Finally, many have bemoaned that our technology will result in poorly trained younger lawyers. The premise is that these tools do many of the things that younger lawyers used to do. Since AI is now doing those tasks, younger lawyers won’t gain training through experience like we old guys did. In addition, the theory is that AI will disrupt the old learning “sitting at the partner’s feet” model.
But just because something will not be done like it used to be doesn’t always mean poorer quality.
All too often, women and people of color ended up at the wrong partners’ feet
The problem with the old system is that the tasks younger lawyers had to do didn’t necessarily make them good lawyers. But there was also an unfairness. If you got to sit at the feet of a good litigator, mentor, and teacher, you got good training. But if you drew a bad one, you didn’t. And all too often, women and people of color ended up at the wrong partners’ feet.
But think about what AI can do. For example, a lawyer right out of law school can ask ChatGPT to give them 100 questions to ask the plaintiff or defendant. With a little help from an older partner, the young lawyer can learn which of those questions should be asked.
More importantly, with reduced costs and these tools, younger lawyers might get the chance to try more cases. The kind of lower exposure case where the trial costs have made it impractical to turn a younger lawyer loose. These tools will allow younger lawyers to access a wealth of trial and litigation knowledge they previously wouldn’t get until they have practiced for several years.
Think about this: there are law students right now at every law school who are contemplating whether they could open their own shop upon graduation. There are countless young lawyers who are unhappy where they are who are thinking the same thing. The reason they don’t: they fear they don’t have the experience that would enable them to get clients and be outstanding litigators. Technology can let them access the kind of experience they need.
The Changing Face of Litigation
We need less cost; we need more trials; we need more younger lawyers with more knowledge and know-how. We need to level the playing field. These tools help meet those challenges head on.
And they will change the face of litigation forever.
