Biglaw, Litigators, Technology

Today's Tech: How Biglaw Litigators Use 3D Printing

Using 3D printing can be a costly proposition, but it's one that often pays off in the end.

By  
on

In my last two columns, I’ve written about how attorneys at the oldest and second-largest law firm in Arizona, Fennemore Craig, were incorporating wearable technology into their practices. These posts were based on interviews with Marc Lamber and James Goodnow, two partners at the firm. Today’s column is Part 3 in that four-part series on how this Biglaw injury law practice group uses 21st technologies in their day-to-day law practice.

In today’s column, you’ll learn how Marc and James have been using 3-D printing to support their clients’ claims–especially during the pre-litigation phase of their cases–and next week I’ll share how they’re using the iPad in unusual ways.

If you’ve read my prior columns about this law firm, you know that they make it a point to incorporate new and emerging technologies into their law practice. Whether it’s Google Glass, the Apple Watch or 3D printing, they’re always experimenting with, and taking advantage of, the benefits technology can offer.

They bought their first 3D printer nearly two years ago and at first they weren’t sure what they were going to do with it. But according to James, it didn’t take long for them to figure out ways to use it in their cases. “After buying one, we quickly found a lot of applications for it, especially in product liability cases. That’s because one of the main questions in those cases is whether the product was properly designed.”

His firm has plans to use 3D printing during all phases of litigation but finds it to be particularly useful during the pre-litigation phase. “Using 3D technology, we’re able to show how the product functions or how it should have been designed. So before we even commence litigation, we use the MakerBot 3D printer with our experts,” he explains. “So, for example, we’ve had product liability cases where the design of certain bolts was at issue and with help of experts and 3D designers we retained prior to filing suit, we’ve been able to show the decision-maker on the other side–whether it’s an insurance adjustor or an attorney–that the bolt could have been made in a better way.”

They’ve used 3D printing for other types of cases as well. “In premises liability cases with quasi-products liability claims where there’s an issue related to the failure of a ladder and how it could have been better designed, 3D printing can be very effective. It’s one thing to tell a decision-maker or opposing lawyer how your product should have been designed. But it’s much more convincing to show them and letting them actually see and hold a 3D-printed prototype makes it much easier to sell the idea.”

James admits that using 3D printing as part of their cases can be a costly proposition but it’s one that often pays off in the end since they’re able to head off costly litigation by encouraging settlements at the outset of a case. “There are downsides to using 3D printing in a case. If you’re not able to settle the case up front and you actually need to create something that can be used at trial, you have to hire even more experts and designers to make sure you’re creating something that would be admissible. Strangely enough, the printer is the cheapest part of the process.”

Sponsored

According to James, another benefit of using technology, including 3D printing, as part of the pre-litigation process is that it requires that they carefully build a strong case right out of the gate. “Using 3D printing early on forces us to think about the cases in a different way. From day 1 we have to think about how we want to use evidence and present it to the jury. In theory we all want to do that but in reality as lawyers, we’re all really busy so we don’t always manage to do that,” he says. “But by using 3D printing to ‘fix’ a defective part, I have to build my case from the ground up in the litigation context before I’ve even filed the lawsuit. This puts me at a massive strategic advantage because I can build my case and even envision the closing argument from the outset.”

James acknowledges that it’s not always easy taking the leap and using emerging technologies in your law practice, but even so, he thinks it’s worth the risk: “It takes courage for lawyers to use new technologies, like 3D printing, in their practices. Especially since I always joke that lawyers would be using quill pens if they could. But often it pays off in the long run. That’s not to say every new piece of technology is great, but there are certainly lots of ways to use new technologies to provide better representation to your clients. And if that’s the case, why wouldn’t you at least keep an open mind about it?”

So that’s how one law firm is using 3D printing as part of their litigation practice. Check back in two weeks to learn about more ways that this firm is innovating with technology, including how it uses iPads to help settles cases.

And, as always, if you or an attorney you know is using technology in a creative or unusual way in your law firm, drop me an email at [email protected]. I’m always looking for new attorneys — or judges — to feature in this column.

Sponsored

Nicole Black is a Rochester, New York attorney and the Legal Technology Evangelist at MyCase, web-based law practice management software. She’s been blogging since 2005, has written a weekly column for the Daily Record since 2007, is the author of Cloud Computing for Lawyers, co-authors Social Media for Lawyers: the Next Frontier, and co-authors Criminal Law in New York. She’s easily distracted by the potential of bright and shiny tech gadgets, along with good food and wine. You can follow her on Twitter at @nikiblack and she can be reached at[email protected].

Topics

, , , , , , , , , , , ,