Lex Connect Curated Reading List
Fear not, we have curated the best Legal Operations & Legal Technology blog and articles.
Enjoy your 30 minutes power reading.
This is a milestone edition of the Curated Reading list as Lex Connect was recently acquired by Yerra Solutions.See the press release here.
We are very excited by the prospect of Lex Connect continuing under the wing of a larger, truly international company. Yerra Solutions and Lex Connect share the same outlook and goal, to support the in-house legal world in a way that is agnostic of any specific vendor, so it really was a natural fit.
Although it will be rebranded in the coming months, the Lex Connect website will continue to be maintained, updated and made available to all for free. You will also will still be receiving the Curated reading list.
Finally, on a more personal note, I have joined Yerra Solutions as their Global COO and look forward the helpingYerra grow even further.
Justice Roberts’ opens his report noting that for a good chunk of American history, pistol duels were an acceptable way to settle disputes. However, Americans ultimately realized that courts, rather than gun fights, are a better method of dispute resolution. We also realized that if courts are used to settle disputes, they need rules of practice and procedure.
Two trends point to a need for lawyers to become technically competent in 2016. First, the gulf between what technology can do for law and what lawyers know about tech is widening. At the same time, clients, companies, and bar associations are becoming less tolerant of lawyers who are not able to proficiently use the tools available.
I first became aware of legal Watson at the 2014 ILTA conference. The private track of large firm CIOs heard a presentation on IBM Watson. Based on second hand reports of it, I wrote Meet Your New Lawyer, IBM Watson. It explains my skepticism about Watson’s immediate prospects in the legal market.
Intrigued nonetheless by the potential of IBM Watson, I attended World of Watson, a slickly produced event at the uber-hip Brooklyn Navy Yard in May 2015. (See my live IBM Watson posts.) It was fun, especially the meet-up of Big Law lawyers and managers that I organized. But at the end of day, I gained little insight into the potential for AI in legal.
In most complex review projects the understanding of relevance evolves over time, especially at the beginning of a project. This is concept drift. It evolves as the lawyers’ understanding evolves. It evolves as the facts unfold in the documents reviewed and other sources, including depositions. The concept of relevance shifts as the case unfolds with new orders and pleadings. This is a good thing. Its opposite, concept freeze, is not.
The purpose of this series of Posts is to do precisely that: to propose and describe a new approach to Technology Contracts. Technology Contracts are currently designed and built (by lawyers) for lawyers, and particularly for litigators.
These Posts propose a different focus for the design of our contracts: contracts built for those delivering and receiving what is promised through the agreement, and dealing appropriately with what to do whenever something goes wrong.
The aim is to create a contract that is an “operating manual” and an “emergency manual” built together, whilst still creating an agreement that works from a legal perspective.
With Legaltech New York 2016 opening Tuesday at the New York Hilton Midtown, it seemed like a good time to poll a broad cross-section of CodeXistas and ask them what startups they are watching in 2016. And it’s also an opportunity to remind everybody that on Thursday (Feb.4) CodeX will be presenting two panels at 10:30 a.m. and 12:15 p.m., moderated by CodeX Executive Director Roland Vogl. Also: The CodeX Pavilion will feature demonstrations and information. We hope to see you there!