The law firm of choice for internationally focused companies

+263 242 744 677

admin@tsazim.com

4 Gunhill Avenue,

Harare, Zimbabwe

Author: TSA Press

Wishing Our Advertisers A Very Happy Thanksgiving – Above the Law




<br /> Wishing<br /> Our<br /> Advertisers<br /> A<br /> Very<br /> Happy<br /> Thanksgiving<br /> –<br /> Above<br /> the<br /> Law


























(Image
via
Getty)

We’d
like
to
express
gratitude
to
our
fantastic
sponsors
here
at
Above
the
Law:

If
you’re
interested
in
advertising
on
Above
the
Law
or
any
other
site
in
the
Breaking
Media
network,
please download
our
media
kits
 or email
advertising
.

Top 10 Biglaw Firm Shows Thanks For Associates (By Giving Them Bonuses!) – Above the Law

Happy
early
Thanksgiving
to
the
associates
at
#7
Biglaw
firm
Gibson
Dunn.
This
afternoon,
the
firm,
which
brought
in
$3,074,016,000
in
gross
revenue
last
year,
announced
both
year-end
and
special
bonuses
for
its
hardworking
associates.

As
expected,
the
firm
matched
the
prevailing
market
rate
established
by
Milbank.
The
bonus
schedule
at
the
firm
is
as
follows.

Screenshot 2024-11-27 at 2.43.30 PM

It’s
a
full
match
with
those
off
the
grid
receiving
a
separate
notification.
No
date
is
provided
for
payout.

You
can
read
the
full
memo
below.

Remember
everyone,
we
depend
on
your
tips
to
stay
on
top
of
compensation
updates,
so
when
your
firm
announces
or
matches,
please
text
us
(646-820-8477)
or email
us
 (subject
line:
“[Firm
Name]
Bonus/Matches”).
Please
include
the
memo
if
available.
You
can
take
a
photo
of
the
memo
and
send
it
via
text
or
email
if
you
don’t
want
to
forward
the
original
PDF
or
Word
file.

And
if
you’d
like
to
sign
up
for
ATL’s
Bonus
Alerts
(which
is
the
alert
list
we
also
use
for
salary
announcements),
please
scroll
down
and
enter
your
email
address
in
the
box
below
this
post.
If
you
previously
signed
up
for
the
bonus
alerts,
you
don’t
need
to
do
anything.
You’ll
receive
an
email
notification
within
minutes
of
each
bonus
announcement
that
we
publish.
Thanks
for
your
help!




Kathryn Rubino HeadshotKathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast
,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her

with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1
 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

Gibson


Bonus Time

Enter
your
email
address
to
sign
up
for
ATL’s

Bonus
&
Salary
Increase
Alerts
.


The Lawyer Behind Canned Cranberry Sauce – Above the Law


What
lawyer
first
came
up
with
the
concept
of
canned
cranberry
sauce?


Hint:
It
was
part
of
an
effort
to
extend
the
selling
period
of
his
staple
crop.
Years
after
canned
cranberry
sauce
had
become
mainstream,
he
said
of
the
innovation,
“I
felt
I
could
do
something
for
New
England.
You
know,
everything
in
life
is
what
you
do
for
others.”



See the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Law Firm Confidentiality Can’t Be Left To The Honor System – Above the Law

A
law
firm
left
its
confidential
internal
documents
with
juicy
information
unprotected
and
was
shocked,
SHOCKED
to

find
out
attorneys
read
them
.
Pam
Bondi
is
next
at
bat
for
the
Attorney
General
job.
While
her
decision
to
drop
an
official
investigation
into
Trump
University

conveniently

after
he
started
supporting
her
will
get
a
lot
of
attention,
don’t
sleep
on
the
TAIL
of
her

fight
over
another
family’s
dog
.
And,
finally,
we
have
an
un-bear-ably
wild
tale
of

a
“bear”
attack
on
luxury
cars
.

With Big-Time Profits, Biglaw Dealmakers Sure Are Thankful 2024 Was A Busier Year – Above the Law



Ed.
note
:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day
.


As
optimism
about
the
deal
market
continues
to
return
and
companies
and
private
equity
sponsors
alike
look
to
transact
through
the
end
of
this
year
and
beyond,
we
expect
more
M&A
activity
is
likely
in
the
pipeline
on
the
back
of
the
tailwinds
of
a
recovering
M&A
cycle
more
generally.
We
are
thankful
for
the
continued
opportunity
to
partner
with
our
clients
on
some
of
their
most
strategic
and
important
transactions
over
the
course
of
this
year
and
are
looking
ahead
to
what
lies
in
store
for
2025.





Katherine
Kraus
,
a
partner
in
Simpson
Thacher
&
Bartlett’s
corporate
department,
in
comments
given
to
the

American
Lawyer
,
on
what
she
and
her
dealmaker
colleagues
are
thankful
for
this
year.



Staci ZaretskyStaci
Zaretsky
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter

and

Threads

or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn
.

What Will Federal Student Loan Repayment Look Like Under The Second Trump Administration? – Above the Law

With
President-Elect
Trump
returning
to
the
White
House
in
January,
borrowers
repaying
their
loans
are
wondering
what
will
happen
next.
His
first
Secretary
of
Education
Betsy
DeVos
was
not
known
for
being
friendly
or
receptive
to
borrowers,
and
getting
loan
forgiveness
was
like
pulling
teeth.

Trump
recently
announced
that
he
would
nominate
Linda
McMahon
to
be
incoming
secretary
of
education.
She
was
the
head
of
the
Small
Business
Administration
during
Trump’s
first
term
and
was
a
member
of
the
Connecticut
State
Board
of
Education
in
2009.
She
also
survived
the

Stone
Cold
Stunner
.
But
no
one
knows
her
position
on
student
loans.

While
no
plans
have
been
announced
by
Trump
or
McMahon,
a
few
existing
programs
are
likely
to
undergo
changes.


The
SAVE
Repayment
Program
Is
Likely
To
Be
Terminated

President
Biden
introduced
a
new
income-driven
repayment
plan
called
Saving
on
a
Valuable
Education
or
SAVE.
This
was
in
response
to
the
Supreme
Court’s
overturning
of
his
executive
order
which
would
forgive
up
to
$20,000
of
a
borrower’s
federal
student
loan.

The
SAVE
plan
would
replace
the
Revised
Pay
As
You
Earn
(REPAYE)
plan.
It
would
cap
the
monthly
payment
based
on
income
and
family
size.
Also,
if
the
monthly
payment
was
not
enough
to
cover
the
interest
accrued
for
the
month,
the
accrued
amount
would
be
forgiven.
Borrowers
with
smaller
balances
(usually
by
attending
community
colleges)
can
have
their
loans
forgiven
in
as
little
as
10
years.

But
Republican-led
states
filed
lawsuits
in
response
and
last
August,
the
Eighth
Circuit
Court
of
Appeals
struck
down
the
SAVE
program.
People
currently
in
the
program
have
been
placed
in
forbearance
status
although
the
time
spent
in
this
status
does
not
count
toward
loan
forgiveness.
The
Trump-led
Department
of
Justice
is
likely
to
let
this
ruling
stand
and
take
no
further
action.

If
SAVE
is
not
saved,
then
borrowers
will
be
placed
in
a
standard
repayment
program
or
on
the
REPAYE
income-driven
repayment
plan.


Borrower
Defense
To
Repayment
Rules
May
Change
Yet
Again

The
Borrower
Defense
to
Repayment
(BDR)
program
allows
for
loan
forgiveness
if
applicants
can
show
that
they
attended
their
schools
based
on
false
or
misleading
information.

Over
the
years,
BDR
rules
and
regulations
have
changed
usually
when
a
new
administration
takes
office
and
legal
challenges
added
further
complexity.
But
to
summarize,
any
BDR
application
submitted
before
July
1,
2020,
was
to
use
the
regulations
promulgated
under
the
Obama
administration.
Any
applications
submitted
after
that
date
would
be
subject
to
different
regulations
established
under
the
Trump
administration.
It
is
believed
that
the
Trump
regulations
made
it
more
difficult
to
obtain
loan
forgiveness
through
BDR.

In
2022,
the
Biden
administration’s
Department
of
Education
proposed
new
BDR
relief
regulations
which
were
believed
to
make
it
easier
to
obtain
loan
forgiveness.
But
this
has
also
been
subject
to
a
court
challenge,
and
an
injunction
is
in
effect
until
the
case
is
resolved.
But
the
department
states
that
borrowers

can
still
apply
for
BDR
relief

while
the
injunction
is
in
effect.

If
the
BDR
regulations
under
Biden
are
struck
down,
then
the
government
under
Trump
may
decide
not
to
appeal
the
decision.

For
now,
whether
the
Biden
regulations
or
the
older
Trump
regulations
will
apply
to
current
BDR
applications
is
unclear.
It
is
also
possible
that
the
Department
of
Education
under
McMahon
or
another
Trump
appointee
could
propose
new
regulations,
although
they
are
likely
to
make
BDR
eligibility
more
difficult.

Borrowers
who
think
they
could
be
eligible
for
BDR
loan
forgiveness
should

apply

as
soon
as
possible
even
though
it
is
possible
that
their
applications
could
be
reviewed
under
a
more
difficult
standard.
They
have
nothing
to
lose
by
applying
as
the
worst
that
can
happen
is
that
the
application
will
be
denied.

Also,
those
who
apply
earlier
may
have
a
better
chance
of
getting
a
favorable
decision
if
they
apply
before
the
floodgates
are
opened.
For
example,
in
2022,
the
federal
government

accepted
a
settlement

where
BDR
applicants
who
attended
certain
schools
would
be
eligible
for
full
loan
forgiveness
under
a
very
lenient
review
standard
if
they
applied
before
the
settlement
date.
But
applications
received
after
the
settlement
date
will
be
subject
to
a
different
and
more
difficult
standard
of
review.


Forgiveness
Under
The
PSLF
Programs
Might
Be
More
Difficult

Borrowers
who
are
enrolled
in
the
Public
Service
Loan
Forgiveness
(PSLF)
program
should
make
sure
that
their
eligibility
status
is
not
in
jeopardy
and
take
advantage
of
any
regulations
set
by
the
current
administration.

In
2018,
it
was
reported
that
99%
of
PSLF
loan
forgiveness
applications
were

denied
.
Also,
in
2017,
Trump
proposed

eliminating
PSLF

in
his
budget
proposal.

During
the
Biden
administration,
the
Department
of
Education
issued
a
number
of
regulations
that
made
more
borrowers
eligible
for
PSLF.

Even
though
Republicans
will
control
the
presidency
and
both
houses
of
Congress,
it
is
unlikely
that
PSLF
will
be
repealed.
Even
if
it
is
repealed,
it
is
unlikely
to
be
applied
retroactively.
However,
it
may
be
adjusted
so
that
only
a
limited
amount
of
loans
will
be
forgiven.
For
example,
President
Obama

suggested

a
capping
the
forgiveness
amount
at
$57,500
in
2014.

Borrowers
who
anticipate
getting
loan
forgiveness
between
2025
and
2029
should
keep
an
eye
on
their
student
loan
account
balance
on
a
regular
basis.
They
should
also
make
sure
that
all
of
their
employer
certifications
are
submitted
on
time.
Lastly,
they
should
obtain
all
news
alerts
involving
PSLF.


You
Will
Still
Have
To
Pay
Your
Loans
If
The
Department
Of
Education
Is
Abolished

Even
though
Trump
has
said
that
he
would
abolish
the
Department
of
Education,
it
is
a
long
shot.
But
even
if
the
department
folds,
it
does
not
mean
a
wholesale
cancellation
of
federal
student
loans.
Student
loan
repayment
servicers
will
probably
continue
to
collect
from
borrowers,
but
they
will
answer
to
another
department,
most
likely
the
Treasury
Department.

Until
Trump
or
McMahon
releases
more
details,
it
is
safe
to
assume
that
borrowers
will
have
to
pay
more
than
what
they
were
paying
before
for
at
least
the
next
four
years.
Also,
those
who
are
delinquent
on
their
loans
or
are
in
default
will
not
be
given
the
kid
gloves
treatment
anymore.
People
with
tight
budgets
should
do
some
financial
planning
as
soon
as
possible.
And
to
those
who
could
be
eligible
for
student
loan
forgiveness
in
the
next
four
years,
make
sure
to
dot
every
“i”
and
cross
every
“t”
so
the
government
will
not
have
an
excuse
to
deny
your
forgiveness
application.




Steven
Chung
is
a
tax
attorney
in
Los
Angeles,
California.
He
helps
people
with
basic
tax
planning
and
resolve
tax
disputes.
He
is
also
sympathetic
to
people
with
large
student
loans.
He
can
be
reached
via
email
at





[email protected]
.
Or
you
can
connect
with
him
on
Twitter
(
@stevenchung)
and
connect
with
him
on 
LinkedIn.

Generative AI And Access To Justice: Incremental Solutions Or Overhyped Promises? – Above the Law

Image
courtesy
of
NetDocuments.

Last
month,

I
asked
whether
generative
artificial
intelligence
is
the
answer
to
the
access-to-justice
problem
.
I
expressed
skepticism,
suggesting
that
capitalism
always
trumps
best
intentions.
Sure,
generative
AI
could
expand
access
to
justice,
but
would
its
potential
ever
be
fully
realized?

But,
maybe,
just
maybe,
my
cynicism
was
misplaced.
What
if
generative
AI
as
an
access-to-justice
bridge
isn’t
just
a
pipe
dream?
What
if
partial
realization
is
all
we
need,
enabling
us
to
chip
away
at
the
access-to-justice
gap,
one
chatbot
at
a
time?

It
certainly
sounds
like
a
plausible
premise:
generative
AI
chatbots
are
a
feasible
way
for
courts
and
legal
aid
organizations
to
improve
access
to
justice.
In
theory,
by
leveraging
GenAI’s
conversational
and
responsive
capabilities,
these
institutions
can
address
longstanding
barriers
in
the
court
system.

But
theory
is
one
thing.
How
does
it
work
in
practice?
I
located
some
examples
and
quickly
realized
that
this
high-tech
gamble
might
be
paying
off.
Select
courts
and
legal
aid
groups
are
already
using
these
tools
to
benefit
the
public
while
also
reducing
administrative
strain
by
providing
self-represented
litigants
with
on-demand
legal
information
and
procedural
guidance.

Still
not
convinced?
Seeing
is
believing.
Check
out
some
examples
of
generative
AI-powered
chatbots
available
on
court
and
public
interest
group
websites:

  • Legal
    Aid
    of
    North
    Carolina
    offers
    the
    Legal
    Information
    AssistantThis
    generative
    AI
    chatbot,
    which
    answers
    questions
    in
    English
    or
    Spanish,
    was
    developed
    in
    partnership
    with

    LawDroid
    .
    It
    assists
    litigants
    in
    obtaining
    answers
    to
    an
    array
    of
    legal
    questions.
  • The
    Nevada
    Supreme
    Court
    recently
    released

    a
    generative
    AI-powered
    chatbot
    .
    It
    was
    developed
    by

    CiviLaw.Tech

    for
    the
    Nevada
    Supreme
    Court
    and
    offers
    easy-to-understand
    legal
    guidance
    in
    multiple
    languages,
    helping
    individuals
    understand
    their
    options
    and
    the
    procedural
    steps
    they
    need
    to
    take.

  • Missouri
    Tenant
    Help
    ,
    developed
    by

    Lemma
    Legal
    ,
    is
    an
    online
    resource
    for
    Missouri
    tenants
    seeking
    legal
    support.
    This
    intake
    screening
    tool
    assists
    with
    determining
    eligibility
    for
    assistance
    before
    speaking
    with
    program
    staff.
  • SANDI
    is
    a
    chatbot
    available
    on
    the
    Eleventh
    Judicial
    Circuit
    of
    Florida’s

    website
    .

    It
    was
    funded
    by
    a
    federal
    grant
    from
    the

    State
    Justice
    Institute,
    in
    collaboration
    with
    the

    National
    Center
    for
    State
    Courts

    (NCSC)
    and


    Advanced
    Robot
    Solutions
    ,
    which
    developed
    this
    AI-powered
    digital
    assistant.
  • The
    Law
    Center
    for
    Better
    Housing,
    the
    Illinois
    Equal
    Justice
    Foundation,
    and
    the
    Lawyers
    Trust
    Fund
    of
    Illinois
    worked
    together
    to
    roll
    out
    an
    AI
    chatbot, 

    Illinois
    Intervention
    . This
    virtual
    assistant
    assists
    Illinois
    tenants
    seeking
    assistance
    with
    housing
    issues,
    providing
    information
    and
    resources
    on
    housing
    rights.

These
examples
showcase
how
generative
AI
chatbots
are
beginning
to
reduce
the
barriers
faced
by
self-represented
litigants.
That
sounds
great,
but
not
so
fast.

While
the
potential
of
these
tools
is
undeniable,
it’s
important
to
temper
enthusiasm
with
a
healthy
dose
of
realism.
The
tools
deployed
thus
far
show
promise
but
are
far
from
comprehensive.
These
endeavors
address
specific,
often
narrow,
legal
needs.
To
remain
impactful,
ongoing
maintenance
and
thoughtful
design
will
be
necessary.

Additionally,
the
success
of
these
chatbots
depends
on
more
than
just
the
technology
itself.
Behind
each
implementation
is
a
patchwork
of
grants,
partnerships,
and
organizational
buy-ins,
which
means
scaling
these
efforts
is
a
challenge.
The
tools
might
work
well
in
localized
contexts,
but
their
broader
application
remains
uncertain,
especially
in
jurisdictions
where
resources
are
limited
or
priorities
lie
elsewhere.

Even
so,
these
incremental
steps
matter.
Each
chatbot
in
operation
today
is
a
test
case,
showing
what’s
possible
and
the
pitfalls
that
remain.

For
now,
generative
AI
chatbots
aren’t
revolutionizing
access
to
justice—far
from
it.
But
they
are
evidence
that
small,
practical
gains
in
access
to
justice
are
achievable
and
that
technology
can
be
part
of
the
solution.
Whether
these
efforts
can
grow
into
a
larger
systemic
shift
remains
an
open
question,
one
that
will
require
sustained
commitment,
funding,
and
innovation
to
answer.





Nicole
Black



is
a
Rochester,
New
York
attorney
and
Director
of
Business
and
Community
Relations
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]
.

Delays Often Benefit Courts – Above the Law

“Justice
delayed
is
justice
denied.”
If
a
party
needs
to
wait
an
unduly
long
time
to
reach
a
just
outcome,
this
undermines
the
benefit
of
the
judicial
determination.
However,
even
though
delay
may
frustrate
litigants
and
attorneys
alike,
it
is
often
advantageous
and
necessary
to
the
judicial
process.
Indeed,
courts
often
benefit
from
delays.

Earlier
in
my
career,
I
litigated
a
complex
case
in
a
busy
jurisdiction.
Several
motions
were
filed,
and
the
court
almost
always
rendered
a
decision
six
months
or
so
after
the
motions
were
fully
submitted.
I
am
willing
to
bet
that
some
kind
of
standard
in
that
jurisdiction
required
judges
to
file
decisions
within
six
months
of
motions
being
fully
submitted,
and
this
court
would
wait
until
right
before
that
deadline
to
render
a
decision.

At
one
point
in
the
case,
two
extremely
complicated
motions
were
pending.
It
was
hard
enough
for
the
lawyers
to
get
their
minds
around
the
issues
and
facts
involved
in
this
case,
and
it
would
certainly
be
difficult
for
court
staff
to
unpack
all
of
the
information
needed
to
render
a
decision
in
this
matter.
We
did
not
receive
a
response
from
the
court
for
months
after
the
motion
was
fully
submitted,
and
I
expected
that
the
court
would
probably
wait
until
six
months
after
the
motion
was
fully
submitted
to
render
a
decision.

While
these
two
motions
were
pending,
and
months
after
the
motions
were
fully
submitted,
the
case
settled.
After
the
settlement
agreement
was
signed,
the
parties
filed
a
stipulation
of
discontinuance
formally
dismissing
the
case.
Within
hours,
the
court
issued
decisions
denying
the
outstanding
motions
as
moot
since
the
case
had
settled.
Since
the
court
waited
to
render
decisions
on
the
outstanding
motions,
the
court
was
able
to
save
judicial
resources
by
not
having
to
adjudicate
disputes
before
the
final
resolution
of
a
case.

In
other
instances,
judges
are
more
overt
when
they
try
to
delay
making
a
decision
so
that
the
parties
might
have
a
chance
to
talk
about
their
dispute
and,
hopefully,
settle
the
case.
A
few
times
in
my
career,
I
have
tried
to
vacate
default
judgments
that
were
entered
against
my
clients
who
did
not
know
about
lawsuits.
Although
default
judgments
can
usually
be
vacated
since
courts
like
to
decide
matters
on
the
merits,
when
there
is
opposition
by
the
party
seeking
to
maintain
the
default,
the
decision
can
be
tricky
and
fact-intensive.
In
addition,
courts
may
consider
establishing
a
bond
or
conditioning
their
order
to
vacate
a
default
on
various
terms.

In
multiple
instances,
courts
have
adjourned
their
decision
to
vacate
the
default
judgment
and
requested
that
the
parties
attempt
to
reach
a
settlement
among
themselves.
Having
a
default
hanging
over
a
party’s
head
is
a
good
motivator
to
resolve
a
matter
without
court
intervention,
since
they
might
be
able
to
reach
a
settlement
they
can
live
with
rather
than
having
their
assets
seized
under
a
default
judgment.
The
party
to
which
the
default
judgment
was
awarded
might
also
want
to
ensure
they
get
something
from
a
settlement
than
risk
as
default
judgment
being
vacated
and
needing
to
litigate
a
case
from
scratch
with
an
uncertain
outcome.
In
multiple
instances,
by
kicking
the
can
down
the
road,
the
court
was
able
to
conserve
resources
since
the
cases
settled
on
their
own
during
the
delay.

In
sum,
although
delay
in
the
administration
of
justice
can
be
a
burden
for
some
litigants,
it
can
also
be
a
powerful
tool.
Courts
may
be
able
to
conserve
resources
by
delaying
decisions
and
establishing
conditions
for
the
parties
to
voluntarily
resolve
a
case.




Rothman Larger HeadshotJordan
Rothman
is
a
partner
of




The
Rothman
Law
Firm
,
a
full-service
New
York
and
New
Jersey
law
firm.
He
is
also
the
founder
of




Student
Debt
Diaries
,
a
website
discussing
how
he
paid
off
his
student
loans.
You
can
reach
Jordan
through
email
at





[email protected]
.

Legal Analytics Company Trellis Unveils AI Tools Designed to Streamline Litigation Workflows

In
a
move
that
marries
a
massive
database
of
state
litigation
data
with
the
generative
capabilities
of
artificial
intelligence,

Trellis
,
a
legal
technology
company
known
for
its
analytics
tools
and
extensive
collection
of
state
trial
court
records,
today
released

Trellis
AI
,
a
new
set
of
generative
AI
tools
aimed
at
simplifying
litigation
tasks.

The
tools
are
designed
to
help
trial
court
litigators
save
time
and
enhance
productivity
on
common
tasks
such
as
motion
drafting,
case
analysis,
and
discovery
by
automating
much
of
the
manual
work
these
tasks
would
typically
involve.

In
a
demonstration
of
these
new
AI
features,
founder
and
CEO

Nicole
Clark

emphasized
that
they
build
on
Trellis’
core
strength,
which
is
its
database
of
millions
of
state
trial
court
motions,
rulings,
and
filings.
The
company
uses
this
data
to
train
AI
models
to
deliver
results
that
are
tailored
to
specific
jurisdictions
and
case
types,
resulting
in
outputs
that
promise
to
be
more
precise
and
relevant.

The
announcement
represents
a
notable
expansion
for
the
company,
as
it
moves
beyond
data
search
and
analytics
into
the
realm
of
AI-driven
litigation
support.

“What
we’re
doing
with
Trellis
AI
is
we
have
basically
a
legal
productivity
platform
that
is
built
on
top
of
all
this
data
as
a
foundation,”
Clark
said.
“And
we’re
building
this
specifically
for
trial
court
litigators,
so
this
is
using
the
court
system,
using
the
data
foundation
that
we
have,
to
build
products
and
output
that
litigators
can
actually
use.”


Motion
Drafting

The
AI
tools
released
today
fall
under
two
types,
Clark
said:
on-case
tools
that
generate
results
related
to
the
case
as
a
whole,
and
on-document
tools
that
perform
functions
specific
to
a
given
litigation
document.

Clark
says
she
is
most
excited
about
the
on-case
tools,
and
one
of
the
most
notable
of
those,
which
Trellis
calls
Draft
Arguments,
is
an
argument
drafting
tool
that
enables
lawyers
to
use
generative
AI
to
draft
motions

for
now,
motions
for
summary
judgment
and
motions
to
dismiss,
with
others
to
be
added
over
time.


Drawing
on
successful
arguments
from
other
cases,
Trellis
AI
can
help
draft
arguments
for
a
motion,
showing
the
sources
it
used
so
lawyers
can
verify
the
recommendations.

Drawing
on
Trellis’
database
of
litigation
documents,
the
tool
uses
AI
to
identify
successful
arguments
from
cases
that
are
factually
and
legally
similar.
It
then
generates
a
draft
motion
tailoring
those
successful
arguments
to
the
facts
of
the
user’s
case.

To
create
a
draft,
an
attorney
starts
with
one
or
more
case
documents,
such
as
a
complaint
or
discovery
responses,
either
already
on
Trellis
or
that
the
attorney
uploads,
and
the
tool
will
search
Trellis’
database
for
cases
with
similar
facts.
It
then
analyzes
the
arguments
used
successfully
in
those
cases,
applies
them
to
the
uploaded
materials,
and
creates
a
draft
motion.

The
draft
motion
is
structured
in
a
standard
legal
format
and
includes
citations
to
relevant
case
law
and
statutes.
Each
argument
is
linked
to
its
source
document
so
that
the
attorney
can
view
the
document
and
verify
the
output.

As
of
today’s
launch,
this
tool
is
available
only
for
California
cases,
although
Trellis
plans
to
expand
it
to
other
jurisdictions.


Case
Assessment

Another
of
the
on-case
tools
released
today
is
a
case
assessment
feature
that
provides
a
detailed
overview
of
a
case,
producing
a
case
report
that
combines
factual,
legal,
and
strategic
analysis,
including
key
facts,
claims,
defenses,
potential
outcomes,
and
recommended
next
steps.

Trellis AI's case assessment tool provides a comprehensive overview of key facets of a case.


Trellis
AI’s
case
assessment
tool
provides
a
comprehensive
overview
of
key
facets
of
a
case.

It
is
intended
to
serve
both
as
a
starting
point
for
litigators
at
the
beginning
of
a
case
and
as
a
playbook
and
reference
source
as
they
progress
through
the
stages
of
the
case.

Here
again,
the
user
would
start
with
the
complaint
or
any
additional
case
documents,
and
Trellis
AI
will
generate
a
report
that
includes:

  • Summary
    of
    key
    facts
    and
    legal
    issues.
  • Analysis
    of
    the
    causes
    of
    action,
    the
    evidence
    required
    to
    prove
    them,
    and
    gaps
    in
    the
    evidence.
  • Recommended
    next
    steps,
    including
    potential
    defenses,
    procedural
    tactics
    and
    discovery.
  • Witness
    preparation.
  • Jury
    analysis,
    including
    demographic
    and
    verdict
    trends
    in
    the
    relevant
    jurisdiction.

Clark
anticipates
that
this
document
is
one
that
attorneys
will
continue
to
return
to
throughout
the
lifespan
of
a
case.
As
new
documents,
such
as
discovery
responses
or
deposition
transcripts,
are
added
as
the
case
progresses,
the
overview
can
be
refreshed
and
regenerated
to
reflect
the
additional
information.

This
feature
is
designed
to
help
attorneys
strategize
about
their
cases
while
also
keeping
track
of
immediate
deadlines
and
tasks.


Document
Analysis
Tools


The
complaint
tool
can
recommend
defenses
to
the
causes
of
action
alleged
in
a
complaint.

Trellis
AI
also
includes
a
set
of
document-level
tools
for
analyzing
complaints
and
other
case
documents.
 These
include:

  • Complaint
    Tools.
    These
    tools
    focus
    on
    the
    complaint,
    analyzing
    it
    and
    outlining
    the
    causes
    of
    action,
    key
    facts
    and
    relief
    sought,
    while
    also
    suggesting
    defenses
    to
    the
    causes
    of
    action
    and
    the
    statutes
    of
    limitations
    applicable
    to
    each.
  • Document
    Analysis.
    This
    tool
    analyzes
    the
    arguments
    in
    a
    document,
    such
    as
    a
    motion,
    breaking
    down
    essential
    elements
    of
    the
    arguments
    and
    defenses,
    key
    evidence,
    gaps
    in
    evidence,
    key
    witnesses,
    and
    more.
  • Review
    Tools.
    These
    tools
    can
    be
    used
    to
    create
    summaries
    of
    case
    documents,
    with
    options
    for
    brief
    or
    detailed
    outputs,
    and
    chronological
    timelines.
  • Research/Writing
    Tools.
    These
    tools
    can
    extract
    citations
    for
    documents
    and
    key
    terms
    for
    conducting
    legal
    research.
    It
    also
    includes
    a
    tool
    for
    generating
    an
    email
    to
    update
    the
    client
    on
    developments
    in
    the
    case.

These
tools
can
be
used
with
documents
hosted
on
Trellis
or
uploaded
directly
by
the
user,
offering
flexibility
for
attorneys
working
with
external
case
materials.


‘Hundreds
of
Millions’
of
Documents

Trellis
differentiates
its
AI
from
other
legal
AI
tools
by
the
fact
that
it
leverages
its
proprietary
database
of
trial
court
documents.
This
allows
the
company
to
train
AI
models
that
are
specific
to
state
laws
and
procedural
rules,
reducing
errors
that
can
occur
when
using
broader,
less
focused
datasets.


Trellis
AI
can
evaluate
the
evidence
in
a
complaint
and
suggest
actions
for
opposing
counsel.

“Trellis
is
uniquely
positioned
to
support
attorneys
within
the
very
court
system
where
their
cases
are
filed.”
Clark
said.
“Trellis
provides
access
to
hundreds
of
millions
of
motions
and
briefs,
representing
millions
of
hours
of
attorney
blood,
sweat,
and
tears
in
research
and
drafting.”

All
of
this
happens
with
workspaces
that
attorneys
can
create
for
each
case.
Users
can
create
workspaces
either
from
docket
documents
already
on
Trellis
or
by
uploading
documents
of
their
own.

To
ensure
transparency
and
to
enable
users
to
verify
results,
each
AI-generated
output
includes
citations
and
links
to
the
source
documents.

Trellis
AI
is
designed
to
enable
lawyers
to
use
its
features
at
the
click
of
a
button,
avoiding
chat-based
interfaces
that
require
users
to
become
prompt
engineers.

Trellis
says
that
it
adheres
to
strict
security
protocols.
All
uploaded
documents
are
encrypted
at
rest
and
align
with
SOC
2
standards,
it
says.


Bottom
Line

At
launch,
the
motion
drafting
tool
is
limited
to
California
cases.
Other
features,
such
as
document
analysis
and
discovery
tools,
are
not
specific
to
any
jurisdiction.
Trellis
plans
to
expand
its
motion
drafting
capabilities
to
other
jurisdictions,
starting
with
New
York,
Texas
and
Florida,
in
the
near
future.

Clark
said
that
feedback
from
beta
users
has
been
positive,
particularly
regarding
the
motion
drafting
and
case
assessment
tools.
Early
adopters
have
highlighted
the
potential
time
savings
and
the
ability
to
focus
more
on
strategy
by
automating
routine
tasks,
she
said.

I
have
not
directly
used
any
of
these
tools,
but
judging
by
the
demonstration
Clark
gave
me,
I
was
impressed
with
what
I
saw.
Particularly
impressive
were
the
on-case
tools
that
use
generative
AI
and
Trellis’
own
extensive
collection
of
litigation
data
to
suggest
arguments
and
strategies.

To
be
clear,
there
are
other
AI-driven
brief-drafting
tools
on
the
market.
But
the
fact
that
Trellis
AI
is
drawing
from
an
extensive
database
of
court
filings
seems
to
have
the
potential
to
be
particularly
powerful.

I
was
also
impressed
with
the
case
report
feature,
which
gets
quite
detailed
in
providing
analysis
of
causes
of
action
and
defenses,
facts
and
witnesses,
timelines,
tactics,
discovery
prep,
and
much
more.

We
should
all
know
the
mantra
by
now
that
AI
is
no
substitute
for
a
lawyer’s
judgment,
but
it
can
certainly
be
a
powerful
tool
for
bringing
together
and
organizing
the
information
that
supports
that
judgment.
That,
it
seems,
is
what
Trellis
AI
does
best.