When all the AI hype and AI promoters were insisting that AI would eliminate lawyers and law firms, I said no, over two years ago – I explained in this post here, in June of 2023, that instead the history of technical adoption in lawyering demonstrated the opposite. I did note as well, however, that this same history demonstrated that the adoption of AI in the legal industry would instead drive ever more complex and sophisticated transactions and lawsuits.
In my own field of ERISA litigation, for instance, the superpowers that AI will grant to law firms that prosecute class action cases is going to lead to more, not less, suits, pressing more types of theories against more types of plans and transactions than has ever been the case. With that, will also come more and more class action defense work for firms. If I had to bet, I would say that this is why, if you are paying close attention to the media coverage of law firm investment in mass tort and other class action defense teams, large firms are investing in this space.
I have pointed out over the past year at least three different themes about change for law firms and lawyers that will be driven by AI, none of which align with the prior, early narrative that AI was the end of law and law firms. They are:
- Commodification of routine legal work previously done on a bespoke basis. I discussed this point here, for instance.
- Impact on fees. I discussed this point here, among other places. Note that this does not mean universal reduction in fees, but rather wider adoption of fee models other than hourly and, perhaps more importantly, a closer alignment between price and value.
- Increased demand for experienced lawyers who can do good work better and faster by making use of AI tools. I discussed this point here and here.
I mention this now not because, as business strategist Jamaal Glenn has noted on LinkedIn, when you make predictions, you should show the receipts later when time has proven you right, but instead because leading general counsels who are charged with adapting to and profiting from the new legal world order being ushered in by AI legal tools are reaching similar conclusions. They are finding that AI is a surgeon’s scalpel they can wield to their benefit, not a bazooka destroying everything it hits.
Most recently and most visibly, Eric Dodson Greenberg, the executive vice president, general counsel, and corporate secretary of Cox Media Group, made essentially these exact same points last week as part of his series on AI on Bloomberg Law, in his column “AI Will Scramble GCs’ Calculus for Hiring Outside Counsel.” He points out the benefits to in-house counsel of the impact of AI on the relationship, including pricing, between companies and their outside lawyers.
For lawyers who sell judgment and expertise, and GC offices that are looking to hire for it and not just for legal bodies to throw en masse and indiscriminately at problems, these are all good things.