Clark Partington hosts AI in legal practice seminar for NWFPA

In our latest edition of ‘The Shapers’, we spoke with Tomasz Wardyński, Founding Partner of Wardynski & Partners, on reshaping and challenging what it means to be a legal professional. Tomasz shares his path through the legal industry - as well his views on why the human aspect still lies at the heart of law, why curiosity will never go out of style, and how the legal world will look as AI becomes embedded within it. Read the full interview on our website now: https://lnkd.in/dSTMDjUf

A great perspective from Tomasz Wardyński on what it means to be a legal professional as AI becomes embedded into law. Absolutely worth a read!

At its most basic level, legal analysis attempts to treat similar fact patterns similarly. Of course, whether two fact patterns are similar is not always obvious, and a lawyer's stock-in-trade is arguing over which precedents are most "on point." The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton highlights how technological change can affect determinations of which precedents are most on point for purposes of a given modern-day dispute. Sometimes, technological development can render twenty-year-old judicial decisions inapposite. Sometimes, technological advancements can actually render fifty-year-old judicial decisions more analogous than more recent precedents, as technology better allows people to do virtually what they used to do routinely in person. To quote Rust Cohle, played by Matthew McConaughey in True Detective, “time is a flat circle.” Both trends were on display in the Court's decision in Free Speech Coalition. Aaron Streett and I discussed this aspect of the Court's reasoning in the latest issue of The Houston Lawyer magazine. Our article is below, and you can read the full issue here: https://lnkd.in/e7k7zgvM Many thanks to Sydney Huber Bateman for facilitating the placement of this article in The Houston Lawyer.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗮 𝗱𝗮𝘆 𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗸 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂’𝗿𝗲 𝗷𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀-𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀, 𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀 — 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗿-𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗴𝗲𝗱 "𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗴𝘂𝗲"? Yuankai Lin of RPC gives us a peek with 𝗕𝘂𝗱𝗱𝘆, the firm’s Ambassadog and Chief Happiness Officer as he seeks to balance the intensity of litigation and arbitration work with a mindful approach to social media in today’s digital world. We look forward to hearing more from Yuankai (and Buddy) at the 𝗟𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗲𝗱𝗜𝗻 & 𝗕𝗲𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗦𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗿 𝗼𝗻 𝟮𝟴 𝗢𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗯𝗲𝗿, where they’ll join others in exploring how lawyers can thrive online while staying true to the profession’s ethical standards. 𝗔𝗹𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗿 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗱, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗷𝗼𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗮𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗿𝘂𝗻 𝗯𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗸: https://lnkd.in/gRUA-8uV #LinkedInSeminar #SocialMediaBestPractices #LegalProfession #EthicsInLaw

𝗣𝗵𝘆𝘀𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 – 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲, 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲𝘀. Every unnecessary trip and every avoidable in-person court date ties up valuable capacities in law firms, legal departments and courts.   This is exactly where Section 128a ZPO, which grants courts the right to opt for a remote hearing, should make a difference – especially in the context of 𝗺𝗮𝘀𝘀 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, which is currently 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝘁𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗚𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺 to its limits.   𝗬𝗲𝘁 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗶𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻, 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗚𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗼 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 – despite having excellent infrastructure.   This reflects a familiar pattern in German reform policy: 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗴𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘀𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀 𝗹𝗲𝗳𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲.   Section 128a ZPO is a textbook example. Instead of defining video hearings as the digital default, it maintains broad discretion – effectively enabling a non opt-in culture.   With the #CoalitionAgreement2025, #CDU #CSU and #SPD announced a commitment to a more efficient and future-ready #justicesystem. To make that credible, one next step should be clear: 𝗠𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗼 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲, 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗽𝘁-𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗹𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘁.   If we demand efficiency, we must legislate with consequences.   #DigitalJustice #DisputeResolution #LegalTech #Litigation #VideoHearing

Announcing the Justice Partner Circle At Free Law Project, our mission is to make legal information free, open, and accessible to everyone. That’s why I’m excited to share the launch of our Justice Partner Circle — a new initiative for law firms that want to lead with innovation and impact. Here’s what it means to be part of this circle: ✔️ Influence the future of legal practice by supporting tech-forward research tools ✔️ Advance access to justice through open access to court data, opinions, and filings ✔️ Gain hands-on support in integrating FLP’s open-source tools (CourtListener, RECAP, Bots.law) into your firm’s workflows ✔️ Access custom packages, CLEs, networking opportunities, and AI-readiness support Firms of all sizes can join — we’ve built tiered membership and flexible packages to match diverse goals. Join us in reshaping how law firms engage with technology and the public good. Read more and see how you or your firm can be involved ➡️ https://lnkd.in/greCnUMx #LegalTech #AccessToJustice #OpenLaw #LegalInnovation

⚖️ 1.3 𝐌𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐋𝐚𝐰𝐲𝐞𝐫𝐬, 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐅𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐔.𝐒. 𝐋𝐚𝐰 Imagine a city with 1.3 million lawyers. Every coffee shop echoes with case law. Every elevator ride turns into a debate on precedent. ☕📚 That’s not fiction — it’s America’s legal reality. From courtroom battles to AI-driven contracts, the U.S. legal ecosystem is vast, evolving, and more interconnected than ever. But here’s the real question: Can one system — with this many minds, rules, and reforms — keep pace with the future of law? #Law #LegalInnovation #USLaw #FutureOfLaw #LegalProfession #AIinLaw #LegalTrends #Justice

A single summer class at McGeorge School of Law changed the course of the career of Kayvan Hazemi-Jebelli ’08, paving the path toward international law. Today, he’s the senior director for Europe at the Chamber of Progress, with experience spanning the U.S., U.K., and EU. With a background in both law and computer engineering, Hazemi-Jebelli is now at the forefront of tech policy and AI’s impact on the legal field. Read his full Q&A: https://lnkd.in/gY3t7Bcp

Writing for Law360, San Francisco partner Winston Y. Chan, Los Angeles associate Nicole Butze and San Francisco associate Christine Bonomo* delve into a recent ruling by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts that may provide a new avenue of targeting the issuance of investigative subpoenas. The ruling quashed a U.S. Department of Justice administrative subpoena directed at a hospital. Crucially, in making its ruling, the court relied not only upon the fact that the subpoena contained overbroad requests for information inconsistent with a proper government purpose, but also on public statements made by the executive branch the court found to be indicative of bad faith or improper motive.   In their article, our lawyers provide historical background on investigative subpoenas, the changing legal landscape of investigative subpoena enforcement, and how technology is evolving the legal framework. *Christine Bonomo is not licensed to practice law in California.

South Jersey's largest law firm has plans to further expand across the Delaware River with several industries targeted for growth.