Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Lawyers are often seen as risk-averse and partial to long-established processes and practices, but in recent years, the legal profession has changed and modernized drastically. It has incorporated technology in ways that impact an attorney's ability to practice more efficiently and effectively. One of these modernizations is the adoption and utilization of litigation analytics, which provides data-driven insights into the past litigation records of law firms, attorneys, courts, and judges regarding trends in findings, damages, resolutions, and remedies.
Litigation analytics has become more than prevalent in the practice of law — in many ways, it has become necessary. The ability to analyze litigation patterns and trends has proven to be valuable in every facet of the legal profession; in fact, Lex Machina supplies legal analytics to law firms, companies, courts, government agencies and judges. Now that practitioners are seeing their clients, opposing counsel, and even judges employing litigation analytics and relying on the underlying data, it's crucial to discuss two key questions: what makes good legal data and what happens when you rely on bad data?
Litigation analytics can be considered a roadmap of sorts — an important guide to ensure the legal professional arrives at the correct litigation strategy or business plan. However, like roadmaps, litigation analytics will only be useful if it's based on data that is complete and accurate. A roadmap that is missing key cities or contains nonexistent roads is more than useless — it's dangerous and can lead the traveler astray. The same is true for litigation analytics — it can be an incredibly powerful tool that empowers attorneys with the winning edge over opponents or competitors, but only if it is complete and accurate. Otherwise, they can end up lost.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Ideally, the objective of defining the role and responsibilities of Practice Group Leaders should be to establish just enough structure and accountability within their respective practice group to maximize the economic potential of the firm, while institutionalizing the principles of leadership and teamwork.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?