NetDocuments
recently
announced
the
Judge
Analytics
App,
an
addition
to
18
other
apps
in
its
ndMax
Studio.
The
new
App
is
designed
to
extract
information
in
a
firm’s
files
about
particular
judges.
I
have
often
said
particularly
in
Biglaw
firms,
there’s
a
lot
of
gold
in
them
thar
hills,
aka
past
efforts
of
the
firm.
From
forms,
standard
pleadings,
and
pure
information,
there’s
a
lot
of
valuable
stuff.
The
problem
has
always
been
how
to
mine
that
gold.
Finding
it
and
getting
to
it
takes
time,
time
you
might
not
be
able
to
bill.
And
I
have
written
before
about
how
vendors
like
NetDocuments
have
used
automation
and
AI
tools
to
take
away
the
time
element
to
mining
the
value
out
of
these
tools.
Now,
NetDocuments
has
taken
this
one
step
further
with
the
introduction
with
the
Judge
Analytics
App.
What
It
Does
So,
what
does
Judge
Analytics
do?
According
to
NetDocuments,
it
“transforms
curated
collections
of
judicial
orders
into
a
structured
data
set.
It
enables
user
to
generate
clear,
on-demand
profiles
that
reflect
a
judge’s
procedural
patterns,
reasoning
methods
and
tendencies
across
key
motion
types.”
That’s
a
mouthful.
Let
me
put
it
in
lawyer
speak.
It’s
an
AI
tool
that
searches
your
firm’s
database
to
extract
information
about
judges
your
lawyers
have
appeared
before,
pulling
out
useful
intelligence
about
a
particular
judge’s
style,
preferences,
and
how
they
may
rule
on
motions.
An
Example
Describing
a
tool
like
this
and
its
benefits
is
one
thing.
Seeing
it
is
another.
Here
is
an
example
from
the
App
about
what
the
tool
can
do:
Why
It
May
Be
So
Useful
If
this
tool
can
do
this,
wow.
This
would
give
you
a
leg
up
over
those
who
aren’t
using
it
and
are
walking
into
court
blind.
I
assume
the
tool
could
also
provide
information
about
the
judge’s
experience
in
certain
matters.
It
was
always
a
roll
of
the
dice
when
I
appeared
before
a
judge
with
whom
I
had
little
familiarity
as
to
whether
he
or
she
was
knowledgeable
about
the
type
of
matter
my
case
might
involve.
The
risk
in
that
situation
is
that
you
either
waste
the
judge’s
time
telling
them
what
they
already
know,
or
you
don’t
tell
them
enough
to
understand
the
issues.
The
App
is
designed
to
eliminate
some
of
the
guess
work
about
judges.
It
also
eliminates
the
time
spent
(and
perhaps
wasted
if
you
don’t
find
anything)
trying
to
find
the
information
and/or
taking
the
time
to
read
all
the
information
about
and
rulings
of
the
judge.
Even
if
billable,
the
amount
of
time
required
to
do
this
kind
of
analysis
would
make
the
task
too
expensive
to
be
practical.
The
tool
could
be
a
particular
benefit
to
younger
lawyers.
I
remember
walking
into
a
courtroom
and
having
no
clue
about
the
judge
I
was
about
to
argue
before
and
their
disposition
about
certain
matters.
It’s
a
scary
prospect,
particularly
when
you’re
young
and
inexperienced.
As
I
have
written
before,
it’s
hard
for
younger
lawyers
to
get
courtroom
experience
these
days.
With
this
kind
of
tool,
it
might
reduce
some
of
the
trepidation
about
letting
a
younger
lawyer
handle
a
hearing.
Not
only
would
the
tool
provide
you
this
information,
perhaps
more
importantly,
it
could
give
your
client
the
information
so
they
could
better
assess
exposure
and
better
enable
a
cost-benefit
analysis
on
whether
a
particular
motion
should
be
filed.
More
transparency.
Better
decision
making.
But
Will
the
Rich
Just
Get
Richer?
Of
course,
being
able
to
obtain
an
effective
analysis
depends
on
the
data
you
have,
and
NetDocuments
is
working
on
tools
to
make
that
kind
of
collection
better
and
more
seamless.
But
quantity
is
important.
If,
in
the
prior
example,
your
database
only
had
one
appearance
before
Judge
Rodriguez,
then
the
value
and
quality
of
the
output
will
be
reduced.
What
this
would
seem
to
mean
though
is
that
firms
with
lots
of
data
and
who
use
NetDocuments
will
be
better
able
to
effectively
use
the
tool
and
have
a
leg
up
over
smaller
firms
without
the
data.
If
so,
that
would
be
unfortunate
and
is
yet
another
example
of
the
rich
getting
richer.
Dan
Hauck,
NetDocuments
Chief
Product
Officer,
nevertheless
believes
the
tool
will
be
useful
to
smaller
firms
that
lack
the
data
of
their
larger
competitors:
“While
some
firms
might
have
more
data
than
others,
not
every
application
requires
significant
data,
we
are
finding
that
many
smaller
firms
are
using
ndMAX
to
scale
their
practices
far
beyond
what
was
possible
without
gen
AI.”
Heather
Harris,
NetDocuments
Sr.
Director,
recognizes
that
more
data
is
better
but
feels
the
tool
is
still
useful
for
smaller
firms:
“Of
course,
with
analytics,
the
more
data
you
have,
the
better,
but
that
doesn’t
mean
you
need
vast
collections
to
derive
intelligence
that
is
relevant
to
your
practice.”
I’ve
known
the
NetDocuments
folks
for
years;
my
old
law
firm
was
an
early
customer.
They
are
in
the
business
to
sell
products,
yes.
But
they
are
straight
shooters.
The
Value
of
Gold
Tools
like
this
are
beneficial
for
lots
of
reasons.
Not
the
least
of
which,
in
today’s
world,
is
the
familiarity
lawyers
have
with
judges
gained
through
years
of
trying
cases
before
them;
knowing
them
even
socially
is
not
what
it
once
was.
Quite
simply,
we
try
fewer
cases
than
ever.
And
lawyers
are
practicing
more
in
multiple
jurisdictions
and
are
more
transient
today.
So
being
able
to
assess
the
judge’s
characteristics
through
your
own
firm’s
experience
is
important.
It
ensures
that
all
litigators
have
access
to
their
partners’
experience
with
a
judge.
Presumably
the
information
from
your
partners
about
a
judge
should
be
the
information
you
trust
the
most.
If
it
works
as
advertised,
it’s
a
“net”
win.
Stephen
Embry
is
a
lawyer,
speaker,
blogger,
and
writer.
He
publishes TechLaw
Crossroads,
a
blog
devoted
to
the
examination
of
the
tension
between
technology,
the
law,
and
the
practice
of
law.