9 Responses to PreSuit: How Corporate Counsel Could Use “Smart Data” to Predict and Prevent Litigation

  1. Ralph, I’m glad to see that you are now preaching about using advanced analytical methods to avoid litigation (which in my book is exactly what i would hope a good part of the super-set of information governance best practices and policies is all about). Count me in as a true believer in the future of analytics and the practice of law, as evidenced by the new initiative in the IG space that I am proud to be a part of (see http://www.iginitiative.com). With a tip of the hat to William Gibson, the future is here, even if unevenly distributed to the readers of Ralph’s column! Well said Ralph!

  2. William Kellermann says:

    Already happening with insurers. Using big data analytics to assign claims administrators to avoid litigation based on claimant characteristics. Also happening in patent matters with Lex Machina. Many more to come…

  3. This would be very bad for risk taking and innovation. Best way to reduce suits is to change the culture and environment around litigation and law suits through lawyer training, improved standards at courts, etc. We should be reducing lawsuits, not reducing innovation and risk taking.

    • Ralph Losey says:

      From your Twitter account I see we share humanitarian ideals, and so I cannot understand the basis of your remark about stopping activities that are anti-humanitarian before they grow and spread. I don’t follow how detecting wrongful, hateful activity is bad for innovation, that is, unless you are a criminal or running a criminal enterprise. Even then it would not follow. Moreover, lawyers don’t cause illegal activities, they defend and prosecute them. For instance, racial discriminations in the work force. The point is to detect it and stop it before someone is forced to sue. That is what presuit is about. And how in the world would stopping discrimination “be very bad for risk taking and innovation.” It would be very bad for discrimination, for bullies and for people who hate and exploit others. Another example, employee fraud. How would stopping fraud be bad for risk taking and innovation. It would only be bad for fraudsters, for discriminators, and other perpetrators of unethical activities. Sorry, you seem to be crossing some wires here. Innovation is not unethical. Innovation is not wrongful conduct. It is not illegal. Neither is risk taking.

  4. Otherwise I am a firm believer in the use of analytics and data science in law practice.

  5. […] just last week in my article on PreSuit, but they deserve more attention than a passing remark. PreSuit: How Corporate Counsel Could Use “Smart Data” to Predict and Prevent Litigation. This diagram, shown in my favorite Penrose triangle, summarizes the […]

  6. […] of the past SME training so that you do not have to start afresh on each search project. PreSuit: How Corporate Counsel Could Use “Smart Data” to Predict and Prevent Litigation. When that happens (I don’t say if, because this will start happening soon, some say it […]

  7. […] PreSuit: How Corporate Counsel Could Use “Smart Data” to Predict and Prevent Litigation. Also see PreSuit.com. […]

  8. […] of corporate email, and other ESI, to detect and prevent law suits before they happen. See: PreSuit: How Corporate Counsel Could Use “Smart Data” to Predict and Prevent Litigation. I call this data analytics based program PreSuit™. It is based on search methods I have […]

%d bloggers like this: