Skip to main content

Legal Tech for Small Firm Practice (Spring 2024)

About the Instructor​

Quinten Steenhuis, QSteenhuis@suffolk.edu

Quinten Steenhuis is a practitioner in residence and co-director of the Legal Innovation and Technology Lab at Suffolk where he is the technical lead of the Court Forms Online project. Before joining Suffolk Law School, Quinten was a legal aid attorney, systems administrator, and software developer at Greater Boston Legal Services for 12 years.

Quinten is also the owner of Lemma Legal Consulting and builds apps using legal technology for law firms around the world, including MADE and UpToCode. He received his B.Sc. in Logic and Computation with an additional B.Sc. in Political Science from Carnegie Mellon University and J.D. (cum laude) from Cornell Law School.

In 2021, Quinten was named a "Legal Rebel" by the American Bar Association Journal. His work has been cited by the White House. In 2023, he was named a member of the annual Fastcase 50.

Mastodon Blog

Meeting Time​

LAW-2156-AD

Tuesdays 02:00PM - 03:50PM, Sargent Hall, Room 305

This course uses the Canvas online course management system. However, you may be encouraged to use Microsoft Teams to contact the instructor or to make use of office hours by other members of the Suffolk LIT Lab, including volunteers.

In the event of bad weather, we may have class over Zoom, but the default will be in-person attendance.

Course overview​

Becoming familiar with legal technology as a consumer, author, or project manager is a competitive advantage in today's legal market. Lawyers today use technology to:

  • Run the business side of the law firm, including
    • Tracking client information
    • Reaching new clients
  • Help make decisions
  • Reduce repetitive tasks through automation and templates
  • Deliver legal services directly to consumers

Legal Tech for Small Firm Practice is a survey-style seminar that aims to introduce you to the use of legal technology in the practice of law. We will focus closely on the access to justice problem and the needs of people who cannot afford to hire attorneys.

55% of your grade will be based on a final project that incorporates legal technology. Most students will create a simple "app" that solves a legal problem using the tools and processes of the Document Assembly Line. You may also choose a different technology to develop your final project. You do not need any prior coding background or experience to earn an "A" in this class.

About half of our in-class time will be spent on discussions and exercises that get you thinking about legal technology, and about half will be hands-on training with a representative sample of legal technology tools. We will spend special attention to the free and open source Docassemble application.

We will have frequent guest speakers and readings that address different aspects of legal technology and law.

Course materials​

There are no required textbooks for this class. All readings will be available online for free.

Course Goals & Learning Objectives​

GOALSOBJECTIVESASSESSMENTS
Gain familiarity with technologies used by lawyers for legal workIdentify and categorize different types of legal technology, comparing the benefits and drawbacks of each tool in various scenariosIn-class discussion, presentations
Recognize ethical and regulatory challenges presented by legal technologyDescribe the current regulatory landscape, delineate challenges posed by ethical rules regarding legal technology, and discuss potential moral considerations in automation decisionsIn-class discussion
Decompose processes into component parts analyticallyMap specific processes, pinpointing inefficiencies and proposing potential improvementsDemonstrated through project work
Develop a software application tailored to legal tasksDefine a legal technology need, collaborate with clients to outline a project scope, formulate software requirements, and automate a chosen process from initiation to completionFinal project; interim assignments
Segment legal rules or knowledge into automatable unitsBreak down a legal rule or knowledge into discrete, automatable segments using diagrams and software toolsAssessments and in-class discussions
Explore career trajectories for tech-savvy lawyersEnumerate and discuss the diverse roles of technology in legal practice and how technical acumen can augment various job rolesIn-class discussion

Grading​

There is no forced curve in this class. Grading of your final project is holistic, focused on your growth and ability to apply the skills we learn in class.

I try to assign final grades based on natural cutoffs in the distribution of student work across assignments. Typically, an "A" grade is equivalent to a cumulative grade of 92 or above.

Graded assignments​

Your final grade will be based on the following work:

ComponentPercent
Legal tech assessment10% (opportunity for extra credit)
Weekly reading and journal entries10% (pass/fail)
Plain language exercise10%
Free tool fiesta10%
Clio University modules5%
App "teardown"10%
Final project outline10% (pass/fail)
Final project presentation5%
Final project40%

My goal is to give you a chance to demonstrate your mastery of the material in multiple ways over the course of the semester and to avoid a single high stakes assessment. You will have an opportunity for frequent feedback and advice on your final project.

Class participation not graded​

Class works best when everyone is an active participant. However, research shows that using class participation as the basis for grading is often arbitrary and unfair. Therefore, class participation will not factor into your final grade.

Philosophy​

The philosophy of this course is that by becoming familiar with legal technology and using it to solve real problems, you will be able to become a better critic, regulator, purchaser, and consumer of legal products as a practicing attorney. I do not expect you to become expert software developers. You should learn "just enough" to be useful in your future work.

I will do my best to provide you opportunities for growth in this class, and I expect you to come into the class with a "growth mindset".

The process of computer programming often involves repeatedly running into errors. Errors are an opportunity to learn. In addition, creating a successful product requires iteration. The first draft is often the first chance to do real discovery about what works and what does not work.

As new coders, you will need to ask a lot of questions. I will never "hide the ball" or refuse to answer direct questions. Questions are part of the learning process, especially for new coders. Failing to ask questions may frustrate and slow you down.

Rule of thumb

If you are stuck on a problem for more than 30 minutes, ask for help! Use Teams, ask a friend, or send me an email. Chances are there will be a more interesting problem to solve after we get past your "blocker".

Software development is a highly results-oriented domain. It is not just okay, but expected to use libraries, prewritten code, and samples to reduce reinvention of basic components of your product. I expect each student to produce unique work, but not to waste time rewriting code that already works to achieve a goal.

Being successful in this class means:

  • Asking for help and feedback early. You will not be graded negatively if you don't understand everything right away. It's expected to need to ask many questions early on.
  • Accepting that you will run into errors and perhaps dead ends
  • Your first draft will look very different from your final product
  • It is not just okay, but an important part of the process to collaborate, share early drafts, and gather feedback.

Software development is a creative endeavor that can be truly exhilarating. There is the struggle of creation and then the excitement and joy of producing something that can live on in the world. Most of all, it should be fun.

Learn more about growth mindset

Policies​

Assignment due date flexibility​

I have arranged a schedule of assignments that paces the work over the full semester. But I understand that it may not account for work in your other courses or life responsibilities.

If the deadline for any assignment does not work for you for any reason, I am embracing a flexible deadline approach to this course. Work may be turned in on an alternate schedule without any grade penalty. To use this flexibility:

  1. Propose a new deadline for the assignment. I will let you know if the new deadline works. (Up to 1 week will normally be automatic).
  2. Understand that it may take me longer (at times substantially longer) to review work that is not turned in on the regular schedule, which may delay your grade and feedback on the assignment.

Accommodations​

If you anticipate issues related to the format or requirements of this course due to the impact of a disability, it is important that you contact the Law School's Dean of Student Office for further information and assistance, including information on disability-related accommodations. We can then plan how best to coordinate any accommodations.

Attendance Policy​

Observe Suffolk Law School's general attendance policy. All work can be turned in electronically through Teams. In the event that the University cancels classes, such as for severe weather, you are expected to continue with assignments as originally scheduled unless otherwise communicated through email.

As of this writing, missing more than 2 classes may require a meeting and permission from the dean to allow you to remain in the course.

Course Schedule​

The schedule, policies, procedures, and assignments are subject to change in the event of extenuating circumstances, by mutual agreement, or to ensure better student learning. This course is a work in progress, and I'm always looking for ways to improve. Therefore, mid-course corrections should be anticipated! This online version will be the most "up to date," so if you print this, just be aware that the "official" version will be the digital version available at this web page.

Policy on use of generative AI and large language models (e.g., ChatGPT)​

What are generative AI tools?​

The line is getting fuzzier by the day, but in general, any tool with which you provide a prompt and get back new or substantially revised text is one I would describe as generative AI. These tools all have a creative function that distinguishes them from tools that simply correct your work.

Examples of "generative AI" tools:

  • ChatGPT
  • Bing Chat
  • Google Bard
  • Google Docs's "Help me Write" feature

Examples of tools that are not "generative AI":

  • Spellcheck and grammar check
  • Microsoft's "Editor" tool
  • Grammarly
  • WordRake

Why we provide guidance on use of generative AI​

  1. To ensure substantive accuracy of output;
  2. To help you understand how to avoid violation of client confidentiality and privacy;
  3. To help you build competency in the use of these tools and to be able to produce your own work in instances where the tools will fail;
  4. To provide transparency into your authorship so that I can appropriately assess your work.

Limits on use of AI​

You may use generative AI tools on all assignments in this course. Where possible, I will provide instruction on how to appropriately use AI on a given assignment.

You should also always follow these general rules:

  1. Don't substitute the AI's judgment for your own. When I ask you to reflect, synthesize, or argue, I am asking for your thoughts, not those of the AI. You may use the AI as an "editor." For example: you can ask it if your reflection is missing anything.
  2. Don't put private or confidential information into commercial AI tools. I hope to provide you access to a Suffolk-owned tool which will be safe to use for this purpose.
  3. Follow the "50% rule": your original writing combined with any prompt to the tool should reflect at least 50% of the word count of the final content.
  4. Check your work for accuracy. Large language models are predictive tools and can make mistakes. Your job is to verify your work.
  5. Let me know how you used each tool. I'll occasionally ask you to provide a log of your conversation with an AI tool, but you should always use attribution.

Class Schedule and Assignments​

About the Legal Tech Assessment

You will all receive a login to the Procertas Legal Tech Assessment. This is a self-paced learning module that should take between 10-15 hours for most students to complete. It will teach you advanced Word, Excel, and PowerPoint skills. You can start this at any time.

The syllabus includes a suggested schedule for working through the LTA.

Learning objectives

In this module, you will explore the world of legal technology and get introduced to Large Language Models (LLMs). You will begin to delve into the functionalities and implications of LLMs in the legal field, and be exposed to the wide range of tools and concepts that you can use in your final project.

Class 1: January 23, 2024 - The End of Cobblers as a Service: Introduction to Legal Tech and LLMs​

Readings

In-class topics:

  • Introduction to our class, themes, and your final project
  • Adopting a growth mindset
  • Overview of legal technology
  • Introduction to Large Language Models (LLMs)
  • Come up with a small firm "persona" to use throughout the semester

Class 2: January 30, 2024 - LLMs Revisited and Plain Language​

Finish Legal Tech Assessment tutorial
Readings

In-class topics:

  • Improve our small firm personas
  • Pitch and evaluate some generative AI use cases
  • Get started with legal tech assessment
  • The importance of plain language in law
  • Practice and exploration of using plain language principles to improve communication
Learning objectives

This module covers the practical aspects of automating legal processes using tools like Gavel and Docassemble. You will engage in hands-on activities to understand the implementation of these technologies in creating efficient legal workflows.

Class 3: February 6, 2024 - Document Automation and Independent Work; Guest Brittany Hernandez from Gavel​

Complete Legal Tech Assessment Excel module
Brittany Hernandez

Read her bio

Readings

In-class topics:

  • Introduction to document automation with Gavel
  • Independent work: conceptualizing a solution for a firm problem
  • Practice with prompt engineering
  • Open the Docassemble playground

Class 4: February 13, 2024 - Docassemble and GPT-4​

Complete Legal Tech Assessment Powerpoint module
Readings

In-class topics:

  • Basics of Docassemble
  • Experimenting with GPT-4 for legal applications inside the Docassemble interface

Module 3: Client Interaction and Generative AI​

Learning objectives

Learn to enhance client interaction using chatbots and intake systems. This module will also introduce you to the potential of generative AI in developing firm-specific knowledge bases.

Class 5: February 20, 2024 - Legal Intake and Chatbots​

Complete Legal Tech Assessment Word Brief
Guest Tom Martin (Law Droid)

LinkedIn

Readings

In-class topics:

  • Creating an intake system for your firm
  • Introduction to Lawdroid chatbots

Class 6: February 27, 2024 - Generative AI and Knowledge Bases​

Complete Legal Tech Assessment Word Contract
Guest Sam Flynn (Josef Q)

LinkedIn

Readings

In-class topics:

  • Exercise: understanding LLM biases
  • Understanding generative AI capabilities
  • Developing a knowledge base tailored to your firm with Josef Q
Learning objectives

This module addresses advanced legal tech tools and their application in career development and legal practice management. You will get practical experience through project work and presentations.

Class 7: March 5, 2024 - ALWeaver​

:::

Complete Legal Tech Assessment Word memo
Readings

In-class topics:

  • Introduction to ALWeaver
  • Practical applications in legal tech

Spring Break: March 12, 2024 (No class)​

Class 8: March 19, 2024 - Clio and Legal Tech Careers​

Guest Rocky Reidel

Bio/Firm website

Readings

In-class topics:

  • Exploring Clio as a legal practice management tool
  • Discussing pathways in legal tech careers

Class 9: March 26, 2024 - Free Tool Fiesta Presentations​

Readings

No readings! Class is based on your presentation.

In-class topics:

  • Presentations on various free legal tech tools
  • Analysis of the tools' impact on legal practice

Class 10: April 2, 2024 - App Design and Workflow Automation​

Readings

In-class topics:

  • Designing and evaluating good legal apps
  • Workflow automation with Pipedream

Class 11: April 9, 2024 - Project Workshop​

Guest Sam Flynn

Sam will join us to help students who are working with Josef Q

Readings

In-class topics:

  • Workshop for ongoing class projects
  • Peer feedback and collaboration

Class 12: April 16, 2024 - Career Pathways Q&A​

Guest Colin Levy

Personal blog

Readings
  • Come to class prepared with at least 1 question about your final project

In-class topics:

  • Q&A session on legal tech careers
  • Guidance on professional development

Class 13: April 23, 2024 - Final Presentations​

In-class topics:

  • Final presentations of student projects
  • Review and feedback session

Important Dates​

  • May 3, 2024: Final projects due at 5 PM
  • May 10, 2024: Last day of final exams (last day of any extensions/makeup work)

Final project (Due May 3rd)​

Overview​

This project involves identifying a real-world problem related to either access to justice or challenges faced by small law firms and developing a technological solution to address it.

The tool's audience is up to you. For example: it might be entirely internal to a law firm, or focused at unsophisticated members of the general public.

You are highly encouraged to create a project that both:

  1. Makes use of paper prototypes or flowcharts to map a useful real-world process improvement
  2. Incorporates 1 or more working prototype technical solutions using a tool we learned in class

You are not limited to producing a fully working prototype of your solution. And you are not limited to using a single tool. For example: you could build a knowledgebase in Josef Q and combine it with an intake interview built in Law Droid.

Use the narrative and written sections of your final project to bridge the gap between your vision and your capabilities and available time. You may also incorporate wireframes or visual elements. However: at least part of your project must involve an interactive element that makes use of the tools we covered in class.

The project is divided into two main parts:

  1. Problem Identification and Solution Pitch (Early Deliverable):

    • Task: Identify a specific issue in the legal field and propose a process improvement or technological solution.
    • Deliverables: A detailed written pitch, including a conceptual "paper prototype" or early design of the proposed solution. This should reflect significant thought and effort, going beyond a general description.

  2. Prototype Creation and expansion on initial pitch:

    • Task: Develop a prototype or a set of prototypes that collectively address the identified problem. Your solution can incorporate elements like intake systems, document automation, or other legal tech tools.
    • Deliverables: A comprehensive prototype (or prototypes) with explanations of how each component works and integrates. While a fully functional integrated tool is not required, if the tool is not fully integrated, the submission should include detailed flowcharts, narratives, or diagrams explaining the envisioned functionality and integration.

Grading:​

This project constitutes 50% of your course grade, evaluated based on originality, feasibility, depth of analysis, and the quality of the proposed solution and prototypes.

1. Initial Pitch Evaluation Rubric​

CriteriaExcellent (A)Good (B)Satisfactory (C)Needs Improvement (D-F)
Problem IdentificationClearly identifies a specific and significant legal issue, demonstrating a deep understanding of its implications and complexities.Identifies a relevant legal issue with good understanding, but may lack some depth or specificity.Identifies a legal issue but lacks depth or is too general.Fails to identify a relevant or specific legal issue.
Solution Originality & InnovationSolution is highly original, innovative, and demonstrates out-of-the-box thinking.Solution is somewhat original, showing an effort to innovate.Solution shows limited originality or innovation.Solution lacks originality, is cliché or too generic.
Feasibility & PracticalitySolution is highly feasible and practical; demonstrates a clear path to implementation.Solution is feasible with some practical considerations addressed.Solution shows basic feasibility but lacks practical details.Solution is impractical or unfeasible.
Depth of AnalysisProvides an in-depth analysis of the problem and solution, with extensive research and thought evident.Analysis is thorough but may lack some depth or research.Analysis is basic and lacks thoroughness or research.Analysis is superficial or missing critical components.
Quality of Written Pitch & PrototypeExceptional clarity, structure, and presentation of pitch and prototype. Detailed and well-conceptualized.Good clarity and structure, with a well-conceptualized pitch and prototype.Satisfactory clarity and structure, but the pitch or prototype may lack detail.Poor clarity, structure, and conceptualization.

2. Final Presentation Evaluation Rubric​

CriteriaExcellent (A)Good (B)Satisfactory (C)Needs Improvement (D-F)
Presentation SkillsEngaging, clear, and professional delivery. Excellently paced with effective use of visual aids.Clear and competent delivery with good pacing and visual aids.Adequate delivery but may lack engagement or effective visual aids.Poor delivery, pacing, or lack of engaging visual aids.
Understanding of the TopicDemonstrates an exceptional understanding of the legal issue and technological solution.Demonstrates a good understanding but may lack depth in some areas.Demonstrates basic understanding but lacks depth or clarity.Lacks sufficient understanding of the topic.
Response to QuestionsProvides insightful and comprehensive responses to questions.Provides adequate responses but may lack depth or insight.Provides basic responses, but may struggle with complex questions.Unable to effectively respond to questions.
Integration of Legal Tech InsightsIntegrates insights from the 2023 Clio Legal Trends Report and other relevant sources effectively.Integrates relevant insights but may not fully utilize or connect them.Limited integration or superficial use of insights.Fails to integrate or utilize relevant insights.
Engagement & InteractionHighly engages the audience, encouraging interaction and discussion.Engages the audience with some interaction.Limited engagement with the audience.Fails to engage or interact with the audience.

3. Final Deliverable Evaluation Rubric​

CriteriaExcellent (A)Good (B)Satisfactory (C)Needs Improvement (D-F)
Prototype Development & InnovationPrototype(s) are exceptionally developed with innovative features. Demonstrates advanced use of legal tech tools.Prototype(s) are well-developed with good use of legal tech tools.Prototype(s) are adequately developed but may lack innovation or advanced features.Prototype(s) are underdeveloped or lack effective use of legal tech tools.
Integration & FunctionalityPrototype(s) show excellent integration and functionality, closely aligning with the identified legal issue.Prototype(s) show good integration and functionality but may have minor issues.Prototype(s) show basic integration and functionality, with noticeable issues.Prototype(s) have poor integration, functionality, or alignment with the legal issue.
Improvement & AdaptationDemonstrates significant improvement and adaptation from the initial pitch, based on feedback and further research.Shows some improvement and adaptation, but may lack significant changes.Shows minimal improvement or adaptation from the initial pitch.Lacks improvement or adaptation; repeats initial pitch.
Depth of Narrative & ExplanationProvides a deep, comprehensive narrative and explanation of the prototype(s) and their impact.Provides a good narrative and explanation but may lack some depth.Provides a basic narrative and explanation, but lacks detail or depth.Poor depth in the narrative, or fails to effectively explain the prototype(s).

Submission Deadlines:​

  • Part 1 (Pitch): February 27th
  • Part 2 (Prototype): May 3rd

This project is an opportunity to apply legal tech concepts to real-world scenarios, demonstrating both your understanding of the course material and your innovative thinking in legal technology.

What tools can I use?​

This semester, we will spend several hours in class working with the open source tool Docassemble and the LIT Lab's Document Assembly Line project, framework. Many students will choose to use this for their final project. You will have the most support with this tool.

You are highly encouraged to use 2 or more tools we learn, with the written narrative or diagrams acting as a "glue".

If you choose a Docassemble form that is appropriate to be hosted on CourtFormsOnline.org, there is a chance that it will eventually be published (usually at least a semester later). You may also choose a Docassemble project that is suggested by a state that the LIT Lab works with, including:

  • Alaska
  • Illinois
  • Louisiana
  • Maine
  • Massachusetts
  • Michigan
  • Minnesota
  • Texas
  • Vermont

You may find a form on the Form Explorer index page. Note: there is no requirement to automate a "unique" form but many high-interest Massachusetts forms have already been automated, which may reduce the chance of your work being published. If you are looking forward to your work being published, it may make sense to choose a form from a different state.

You may also use:

  • Gavel
  • Pipedream
  • Microsoft Forms + Power Automate
  • Law Droid
  • Josef Q
  • Or any other form building or chatbot tool, even if we didn't discuss it in class (with preapproval)

Examples of past projects​

Students are often inspired by a legal process they have been part of or that came up in a law firm they worked for. Past projects have included:

  • divorce
    • intake
    • triage between 1A and 1B
    • pretrial memo
    • simple divorce automation
  • restraining orders
    • triage between 209A and 258E
  • housing
    • eviction answer
    • motion to stay execution
  • estate planning
  • intake for a personal injury firm

How complete should it be?​

Think of this as similar to a model bridge that an architecture student might build in class. Your project should be considered a useful prototype, not at the same level as a commercial tool. Specifically, it should:

  • Run through to the end
  • Make good use of plain language, a logical question order and organization
  • Be enough to convince a decision maker to invest in making a final, refined version of your tool

An excellent document assembly or intake project will:

  • have 10-20 screens and
  • complete a 1-2 page form

An excellent triage project will:

  • have 20-30 screens and
  • provide structured legal information about 3-5 possible scenarios

Expect to spend between 30-50 hours on your final project, including research, testing, and planning.

What if I can't code?​

You will not be expected to know how to code before you join the class. I will teach you the skills that you need.

A large portion of your grade will be based the "soft" skills--selection of the right focus, breaking a rule into logical components, plain language, and question order and structure.

When (not if) you run into a bug or software challenge, just ask for help! That is part of the learning process, and asking for help is not just OK but expected to succeed in the class.

You may also select a tool based on the level of coding required. Choosing a tool that requires less coding knowledge will not harm your grade. But be sure that you understand the tradeoffs and fit the project to the tool.

Getting started with your project​

Identify a topic, a potential audience for the tool, and a goal​

In the process of selecting a project, consider:

  • Who your audience likely is
  • What goal they would have
  • How your project can and cannot address their goal
  • What work they would need to do independently of your project to complete their goal, both before and after using your app

Research​

Use your legal research skills to identify the relevant statutes, rules, and context that your user would need to achieve their goal.

Now, put your proposed app in the context of the wider goal. Document the information that you can include in the app to help the user, and the information that you need to provide both before and after they use your app.

Document the location and sources that supports your work.

Draft an output document​

Start with the output first. Identify the questions that you need to ask your user to complete the output of your app.

If you have chosen one or more forms, the output already exists. If you are creating an intake questionnaire, you may want to start by creating a simple Microsoft Word document with the information.

Write draft questions​

Your questions should not be limited to the literal fields on an existing form. They will include:

  • Screening questions that decide if the tool is appropriate for the user
  • Questions that fill in the blank spaces on the form
  • Intermediate questions that help the user answer blank spaces
  • Questions that guide the user to correct "next steps"

Build a first prototype​

If you are working with Docassemble, you can use the Weaver to build a prototype that can be refined.

Flowchart.fun can also help you diagram your work.

Refine​

Your initial prototype will be the first chance for you to run the project through from start to finish. You will likely realize a lot of things that you want to change.

If you are developing a form in Docassemble, follow the editing guidelines to make some of the most common changes.

Gather feedback and refine again​

Now that you have built a rough version of your tool, get it in the hands of real users. You should consider two kinds of users:

  • Subject matter experts, and
  • Users that are relatively close to the profile of your real user.

Ideally, set up a time to walk through the app together with both kinds of users. You can run through the app over Zoom. Get feedback from at least 3 to 5 users.

Follow the guidance on running a usability test to get the most out of the feedback sessions.

Create a wishlist of improvements​

Getting feedback can be like drinking from a firehose. Some of it will be easy to act on. Some will contradict feedback from other users. Some will be plain wrong.

Do your best to sort through the feedback and come up with a prioritized list of future changes. Implement the top priority ones, and be ready to save the rest for a future person to pick up some day! You won't be able to implement all of the ideas within the time you have to complete this project.

Course-specific websites​

Software tools used in this class​

We may make use of some of the following free websites and software applications:

Required software will not need to be installed on your computer. You can use a Windows, Macintosh or Linux computer for all course assignments.

Independent reading​

If you would like to stay up to date with the legal tech world, I recommend: