Close Menu
Legal MagLegal Mag
  • Home
  • Legal News
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation
  • Regulation
  • Technology
  • More
    • Firms
    • Law Practice
    • Trending
    • Press Release
What's On

Seven charged in $100M California jewelry heist, largest in US history

June 19, 2025

States challenge bankrupt 23andMe’s right to auction genetic information

June 11, 2025

Jimmy Buffett’s widow battles co-trustee over $275 million trust

June 6, 2025

Longtime Hardee’s franchisee sues chain over franchise agreement dispute

May 29, 2025

Apple warns ruling in App Store case may cost ‘substantial sums annually’

May 8, 2025
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Legal MagLegal Mag
Newsletter
  • Home
  • Legal News
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation
  • Regulation
  • Technology
  • More
    • Firms
    • Law Practice
    • Trending
    • Press Release
Legal MagLegal Mag
Home » Limitations of Generative AI in Civil Jury Trials
Technology

Limitations of Generative AI in Civil Jury Trials

News RoomBy News RoomJuly 9, 20242 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest WhatsApp Email

Generative AI has made significant strides in various fields, promising to revolutionize how we handle complex tasks. It’s no wonder that clients, attorneys, and law firms are drawn to its fast, inexpensive, and clear output. The allure of using generative AI for drafting opening statements, closing arguments, direct and cross-examinations, creating graphics, and assisting with trial motions is strong. This allure and the marketing hype ignores a fundamental truth: Generative AI is not yet ready for the courtroom.

Diverse Audiences With Unique Needs

A jury trial is a multifaceted event, involving distinct audiences: the judge, the jury, client representatives, and witnesses. Each of these audiences have different needs and will require a tailored approach that will dynamically change throughout the trial.

  1. The Judge: Judges are concerned with the trial record, the potential for appeal, maintaining courtroom control, and efficient time use. They require clear, legally sound arguments. Understanding the judge’s experience and background is crucial. A seasoned judge may have a firm view of how a trial should proceed, while a newcomer might still be shaping their approach. Each judge’s unique viewpoint, philosophy, and rules play a significant role in the trial’s dynamics. Generative AI, however, lacks the nuance to adapt to these individualized needs effectively.
  1. The Jury: Comprising individuals from diverse backgrounds, jurors have no personal stake in the case outcome but are tasked with delivering a fair verdict. They must understand complex legal rules and concepts, making clear and relatable presentation of evidence crucial. Emotional appeals, compelling storytelling, and witness credibility are vital here—subtleties generative AI often misses.
  1. Client Representatives: These individuals, whether in-house legal counsel focused on costs and expectations or high-ranking corporate officers viewing the trial as an extended negotiation, have different goals and concerns. Their anxiety over trial outcomes is heightened by their limited control over courtroom proceedings. Generative AI cannot provide the reassurance and strategic updates these clients need.
  1. Witnesses: Witnesses, who range from nervous laypeople to compensated experts, are critical to the case. Their testimony needs to be clear, concise, and compelling. Preparing and managing witnesses requires a human touch. Many factors outside the courtroom and concerns about the future can have significant impact on the emotions, preparation and cooperation of witnesses. Generative AI lacks the information and capabilities to address these outside factors and concerns.

Conflicting Goals and Contexts

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Previous ArticleAppeals Court Clears Counsel of Sanctions Ordered Under Phila.’s Med Mal Program
Next Article Who Got the Work: Sheppard Mullin Team Steps In to Defend Visionox in Patent Case

Related Posts

AI Startup Co-Founded By A&O Shearman Recruit Acquired By Thomson Reuters

August 22, 2024

Richard Susskind, Now Special Envoy for Justice and AI, Talks AI’s Role in A2J

August 22, 2024

Spellbook Launches ‘Spellbook Associate,’ a Legal AI Agent for Transactions

August 22, 2024
Latest Articles

States challenge bankrupt 23andMe’s right to auction genetic information

June 11, 20250 Views

Jimmy Buffett’s widow battles co-trustee over $275 million trust

June 6, 20252 Views

Longtime Hardee’s franchisee sues chain over franchise agreement dispute

May 29, 20253 Views

Apple warns ruling in App Store case may cost ‘substantial sums annually’

May 8, 20253 Views
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • Vimeo
Don't Miss

The 2024 Am Law 100: Ranked by Gross Revenue

By News RoomApril 16, 2024

For the full 2024 Am Law 100 report, click here. For more ways to analyze the…

The 2024 A-List: Top 20 Firms

August 6, 2024

Defending Claims Where Extreme Weather Is to Blame: Our Changing Climate’s Impact on Civil Litigation

July 18, 2024
© 2025 Legal Mag. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Advertise
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.