COURT TECHNOLOGY AND TRIAL PRESENTATION

The Court Technology and Trial Presentation Blawg features articles, reviews and news of interest to lawyers and other legal professionals. This blog is published by Ted Brooks, a Trial Presentation and Legal Technology Consultant, Author and Speaker. Ted's trial experience includes the Los Angeles Dodgers divorce trial, People v. Robert Blake murder trial, and a hundreds of high profile, high value and complex civil matters.

All materials © Ted Brooks, unless otherwise indicated.

SOCIAL Twitter -- LinkedIn -- Facebook WEB www.litigationtech.com PHONE 888-907-4434

Thursday, June 8, 2023

Litigation-Tech and Abraham Lincoln Share Common Interests

 

Image credit: Al Holguin

Litigation-Tech has been around for many years, helping attorneys navigate their way onto the technology highway in the courtroom. We have a lot of stories to tell, but here's some insight from one of our very first clients.

Abraham Lincoln was a master of using language to persuade and inform. He was also a skilled storyteller, and he knew how to use visuals to illustrate his points. If he were alive today, he would likely be a big fan of courtroom technology and visuals.

There are many ways that courtroom technology can be used to enhance the presentation of evidence and arguments. For example, video depositions can allow witnesses to testify from anywhere in the world, and interactive exhibits can help jurors understand complex concepts. Lincoln would have appreciated the ability to use these tools to make his cases more persuasive.

Visuals can also be a powerful way to communicate with jurors. For example, charts and graphs can help jurors understand complex data, and photographs can help them visualize crime scenes or other important evidence. Lincoln was a master of using visuals in his speeches and writings, and he would likely have used them to great effect in the courtroom.

Of course, courtroom technology and visuals are not without their drawbacks. For example, they can be expensive, and they can be difficult to use. However, the benefits of using these tools often outweigh the costs. Lincoln was a skilled attorney who was always looking for ways to improve his craft. He would have embraced courtroom technology and visuals as a way to make his cases stronger.

Here are some specific examples of how Lincoln might have used courtroom technology and visuals in his cases:

  • He could have used video depositions to get testimony from witnesses who were unable to travel to the courtroom.
  • He could have used interactive exhibits to help jurors understand complex concepts, such as the economics of a particular industry or the science of a particular crime.
  • He could have used charts and graphs to help jurors understand complex data, such as financial records or population demographics.
  • He could have used photographs to help jurors visualize crime scenes or other important evidence.
  • Of course, Zoom was not a thing back when we first started, but were he alive today, Honest Abe would be all over the remote and hybrid trial testimony.

Lincoln was a master of persuasion, and he would have used courtroom technology and visuals to his advantage. These tools would have allowed him to present his cases more effectively and to connect with jurors on a deeper level. And of course, Abraham Lincoln's go-to service provider would have been Litigation-Tech!

(Note: Please do not cite this in court, since some parts may be generated by Google Bard and MidJourney)

 


Wednesday, May 31, 2023

Stay in Your Lane


If you don't know what you're doing, don't do it. It's okay to hire someone else who does know what they are doing, but don't waste your own time, your client's money, and potentially your career trying to do things you know nothing about. There are experts for that.

Rule 1.1 in the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The original Rule 1.1 states: “A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.” 

Comment 8: Maintaining Competence.
To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, engage in continuing study and education and comply with all continuing legal education requirements to which the lawyer is subject.

Q: Why would a lawyer use ChatGPT to cite cases?

From ChatGPT:

A: There could be several reasons why a lawyer might use ChatGPT to cite a case or seek legal information. Here are a few possibilities:

1. Research assistance: ChatGPT can provide quick access to legal information and precedents, making it a valuable tool for lawyers conducting legal research. Lawyers may use ChatGPT to find relevant cases, statutes, or legal principles to support their arguments.

2. Efficiency and convenience: ChatGPT allows lawyers to obtain information and answers in real-time. Instead of manually searching through extensive legal databases, they can ask specific legal questions to ChatGPT and receive prompt responses, saving time and effort.

3. Broad legal knowledge: ChatGPT has been trained on a wide range of legal texts, including case law, statutes, and legal opinions. As a result, it has a vast repository of legal knowledge that can be useful for lawyers when preparing for cases, drafting legal documents, or seeking guidance on complex legal issues.

4. Preliminary case assessment: Lawyers may use ChatGPT to get a preliminary understanding of the relevant legal principles and precedents related to a specific case. By inputting key details of the case, they can gauge how existing legal principles may apply, providing a starting point for further analysis.

5. General legal guidance: In situations where lawyers need quick answers to legal questions or require general legal guidance, ChatGPT can serve as a useful resource. It can provide insights into legal concepts, procedural matters, or general legal principles.

"However, it is important to note that while ChatGPT can provide valuable information, it should not be considered a substitute for professional legal advice. Legal professionals should exercise their own judgment, verify the accuracy of the information obtained, and rely on their legal training and expertise when applying it to specific cases."

Other than the introduction and question, everything is quoted directly from ChatGPT, including the final paragraph. This is going to be a tough lesson for some.

Sunday, April 2, 2023

Bard vs. ChatGPT: What are the top 5 areas in legal work that cannot be replaced by AI?


Bard:

Here are the top 5 areas in legal work that cannot be replaced by AI:

  1. Legal research. AI can help lawyers with legal research by providing them with access to vast amounts of data and by helping them to identify relevant cases and statutes. However, AI cannot replace the human judgment that is necessary to evaluate the legal significance of this information. Lawyers must be able to understand the context of a case and to apply the law to the facts in order to provide sound legal advice.
  2. Legal analysis. AI can help lawyers to analyze legal documents and to identify potential issues. However, AI cannot replace the human ability to think critically and to apply legal principles to specific situations. Lawyers must be able to understand the nuances of the law and to apply it to the facts of a case in order to provide sound legal advice.
  3. Legal writing. AI can help lawyers to draft legal documents, such as contracts and pleadings. However, AI cannot replace the human ability to communicate effectively and to tailor legal documents to the specific needs of a client. Lawyers must be able to understand the needs of their clients and to communicate their legal advice in a clear and concise manner.
  4. Legal negotiation. AI can help lawyers to prepare for negotiations and to identify potential points of agreement. However, AI cannot replace the human ability to build relationships, to read body language, and to persuade others. Lawyers must be able to understand the needs of their clients and to build relationships with opposing counsel in order to achieve the best possible outcome for their clients.
  5. Legal advocacy. AI can help lawyers to prepare for trials and to present arguments to a judge or jury. However, AI cannot replace the human ability to connect with an audience and to persuade them to see things your way. Lawyers must be able to understand the facts of a case and to present their arguments in a clear and persuasive manner in order to achieve the best possible outcome for their clients.

In conclusion, AI can be a valuable tool for lawyers, but it cannot replace the human judgment and skills that are necessary to provide sound legal advice and representation.


ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I cannot provide a definite answer to this question as the capabilities of AI technology are continuously evolving, and new developments could potentially impact the scope of legal work that can be automated. However, here are five areas of legal work that are considered to be challenging to replace with AI technology:

  1. Legal strategy and advice: AI can analyze data and provide insights, but it cannot replace the human ability to provide legal strategy and advice based on experience, intuition, and judgment.
  2. Negotiation: AI may be able to assist with some aspects of negotiation, such as analyzing contract terms or identifying potential solutions, but it cannot replace the human ability to negotiate, build relationships, and understand the emotions and motivations of the parties involved.
  3. Complex legal reasoning: AI can analyze large amounts of data and provide insights, but it is challenging to replicate the depth of human legal reasoning, particularly in complex and novel legal cases.
  4. Legal drafting: While AI can assist with drafting routine legal documents, such as contracts or wills, it cannot replace the human ability to draft complex legal documents, such as legal pleadings, that require a deep understanding of legal principles and persuasive writing.
  5. Human interaction: The legal profession requires significant human interaction, including client consultations, court appearances, and negotiations, which require social skills and emotional intelligence that AI cannot currently replicate.

Again, this is not an exhaustive list, and it is possible that AI technology will evolve to impact these areas of legal work in the future.


NOTE: Thanks to Jeffrey Brandt, Editor of PinHawk Law Technology Digest for pointing out that it appears that the introductions and conclusions are my own. In fact, they are each written in their entirety by their respective platforms.