And while in recent years the use of formal office memoranda has declined somewhat, giving ground to less expensive alternatives, such as informal email memoranda and oral research reports, the underlying, element - focused
predictive analysis lawyers use to evaluate likely case outcomes has not changed.
Not exact matches
JS: In the litigation arena where I practice, aside from
predictive outcomes and online dispute resolution,
lawyers can expect to see programming that allows their smart devices to synthesize Complaints or Answers in a matter of minutes and provide them with an almost immediate
analysis of relevant case or statutory law.
All of these factors are well recognized, and it comes as no surprise to any experienced
lawyer that the traditional
predictive analysis — that is, a precedent - focused
analysis of the potentially applicable elements and defenses — will not always produce accurate forecasts of case outcomes.
For generations of
lawyers, this analytical method has formed the backbone of
predictive analysis.
Predictive coding continues to make inroads in eDiscovery demonstrating that software
analysis is more accurate and faster that hordes of associate
lawyers clicking on documents on screens.
Finally, and perhaps not obviously at all,
lawyers also work with technology — not simply word processing and email, but software for document generation, electronic discovery,
predictive coding and technology assisted review,
analysis by rules - based expert systems, blockchain.
In fact, Mr Thio, in his article, explicitly mentioned that «senior
lawyers will not be spared either: the development of
predictive analysis software has meant that the experience and intuition that we value can now be replaced with a computer's predictions as to the outcome of a case or its likely settlement value» (read the original article here).
Sure, judge,
lawyer and venue selection will be gamed using artificial intelligence and
predictive analysis in a Moneyball fashion; they already have.