top of page

Your Weekly Lawtomatic Digest

The Appetizer: Sponsors

The Main Course: 5 Things That Made Me Think This Week

  • Legal Tech, NYC Style: this is a good interview on "The Geek in Review" podcast of 4 leaders in legal tech (Felicity Conrad, Christian Lang, Anna McGrane, and Michael Weinberg). They're putting together a Law & Tech event at NYU on 10/15 (which seems worth checking out), but I really like it because the conversation goes more broadly into their own experiences with innovation and building a thriving community in New York.

  • NSF Gives a Grant to Research an Open PACER: an interdisciplinary team from Northwestern Law School just got an award from the National Science Foundation to build an open, searchable court docket platform for the public and researchers to use. There's definitely an irony to the situation. As Jason Tashea from the ABA Journal noted on Twitter: "Can we appreciate for a moment the insanity behind a federal government that paid for the creation of a bad, semi-paywalled database and then paid other people to make a free, useful version of the same database?" In any event, we are where we are, and it's excellent that efforts are being made to fix PACER and make it accessible. Kudos to the NSF and the Northwestern Law team working on this.

  • LTN Tech Survey 2019: the ALM Legal Tech News Survey is out. It's expensive to purchase, but they've shared some highlights for free...and they're pretty interesting. For example, only 16% of CIOs and CTOs at top law firms think alternative legal service providers are a "large risk" to their business model. I respectfully disagree.

  • The New Legal Economy: Jordan Furlong explains, well, the stuff the 84% of CIOs/CTOs in the above survey might not be focusing on: the new way legal services are consumed and sold, and how that will cause increasing shifts in the underlying economics of legal work.

  • Redaction Revisionist History: Bob Ambrogi reports on the lawyer-speak Jones Day used to explain their botched redaction of secret grand jury documents that resulting in sharing information that never should have gotten out. Also, as a public service, here's the Lawyerist's guide to properly redacting docs should you ever need to do so.


About Gabe Teninbaum

Gabe Teninbaum (@GTeninbaum) is a professor at Suffolk Law (with additional affiliations at Yale, Harvard, and MIT) focusing on legal innovation, technology, and the changing business of law. Every day, he digest tons of content on these topics. The goal of Lawtomatic, his newsletter, is to curate the most interesting, valuable, and thought-provoking of these ideas.

Interested in the Lawtomatic Newsletter, subscribe here!

bottom of page