Technology

Are Robots Coming For Lawyers? Not Until They Can Translate Legalese

The fear of doomsday is misplaced.

By  
on

If you have read recent headlines related to the coming age of the artificial intelligence (AI) workforce, you might think the future for lawyers is bleak.

A quick scan of Internet headlines yields such gems as:

“The robot lawyers are here – and they’re winning”

“Lawyer-Bots are shaking up jobs”

“Will lawyers become extinct in the age of automation?”

And while I normally tend to believe everything I read on the Internet…I tend to think the fear of doomsday is misplaced.

Admittedly there are some functions of our jobs AI can probably handle. Basic contracts, wills, and bills of sale are all ripe for AI intervention. And frankly, since it has been a number of years since I took my Trusts & Estates class, AI may even do a better job drafting a will than I could. But even if AI continues to improve to the point it can write flawless case briefs, I am firmly convinced they will never be able to master my chief role as in-house counsel, that of translator.

Sponsored

You see, while the AI may continue to catch-up to the speed and intellect of the average lawyer, it will never be able to read and translate the most recent court case or federal law into the plain speak my c-suite needs in order to make a decision.

While I do spend a great deal of time on the aforementioned tasks currently under AI disruption, I spend even more time sitting down with my CEO and his colleagues making sure they understand the legal ramifications of the latest issue my team may be dealing with. Take a very elementary, but common, interaction our team had with the director of one of physician practices recently.

Attorney: “Dr. Bob, Dr. Smith is a party to a medical malpractice suit and the court has subpoenaed some of Dr. Smith’s records. I am going to need to search Dr. Smith’s computer to see if he has any responsive records.”

Dr. Bob: “I see, what exactly is a subpoena?”

Attorney: “It is a common legal tool a court can employ which basically serves as a request for documents.”

Sponsored

Dr. Bob: “What if I decline to turn over Dr. Smith’s files? Am I really required to do this? My boss didn’t tell me I need to do this, I am going to have to ask her first.”

Attorney: “Dr. Bob, I assure you I would not be here to ask for access to Dr. Smith’s records unless I was compelled to do so. You are more than welcome to call your supervisor, but trust me when I say I will have her backing. Also, please know, I am on Dr. Smith’s team and will do all that I can to protect him, but I need access to responsive documents now so we can stay in the court’s good graces.”

This conversation went on for several more minutes before Dr. Bob finally began to understand that a subpoena is not near as scary as it sounds, and I that I and my fellow in-house colleagues were actually the good guys.

So AI, do your worst. If it took me over five minutes to explain a simple subpoena to a colleague of mine with a medical degree, I can only imagine how many more years of programming you need before you will be able to accomplish the same task.

And if AI is able to support that level of sophistication at some date in the future, while I will be the first to say I was wrong, I will also, hopefully, be retired and it will be the next generation’s problem to deal with, not ours.

Stephen R. Williams is in-house counsel with a multi-facility hospital network in the Midwest. His column focuses on a little talked about area of the in-house life, management. You can reach Stephen at stephenwilliamsjd@gmail.com.

CRM Banner

Topics

, , ,