Lawyers have always been accountable for their work. That was true before AI, and it is just as true now. A brief carries your name. An argument carries your judgment. A citation carries your reputation. None of that changes because an AI tool helped you produce it faster.��

That’s��why when firms talk about adopting AI for legal work, the first question��shouldn’t��be about speed or cost savings. It should be: can I��actually verify��what this produces? If you��can’t��trace an output back to its source, check whether that source is still good law, and inspect the reasoning that connected the two, you��don’t��have work product. You have a draft you��can’t��stand behind.��

That standard is not new.��What’s��new is how many lawyers are finding out the hard way that the AI tools they adopted��weren’t��built with it in mind.��

Courts across the United States have now sanctioned attorneys for��submitting��briefs with fabricated citations, false quotes, and mischaracterized precedent — all generated by AI and not verified by the attorneys. When those tools are built on content scraped from the web rather than authoritative legal sources��maintained��by practicing attorneys, the risk of error is structural. The AI has no way to know whether a case is still good law, whether a statute has been amended, or whether a citation��actually supports��the argument��it’s��being used to make. Verification becomes difficult not because the tools��don’t��show their work, but because the underlying sources��can’t��be trusted in the first place.��

At��Thomson��Reuters,��we��understand��that lawyers��don’t��just need to find the law — they need to be able to stand behind what they find.��We’ve��always built Westlaw��and Practical Law��with that in mind, and��it’s��the same principle we carried into CoCounsel Legal from the very beginning.��

Built for Verification at Every Stage��

When we designed CoCounsel Legal, we started from a simple premise: a lawyer should be able to verify everything the AI produces before putting their name on it. That meant building��tools that give attorneys everything they need to do that��verification��themselves,��at every stage of the workflow.��

As the research unfolds,��Deep Research��shows you its work in real time, step by step. You can follow the reasoning as it develops,��explore��findings as they��emerge, and��refine��the research with more specificity��by answering��additional��questions.����

As citations are built, two things work in parallel.��KeyCite��is woven into every stage of the research workflow, flagging cases overruled in part, warning of proposed amendments to statutes, and surfacing cases that are��frequently��cited together even when they��don’t��cite each other. Alongside it,��CoCounsel Legal’s patent-pending citation ledger��tracks every source the AI draws on throughout the research process and confirms that each source was��actually read��and reviewed — not just referenced.��Together, they give attorneys what they need to��answer the question��that��should��precede every citation��they rely on: does this hold up?��

Before anything goes out, two more layers of review engage.��The Verify function, launched in February 2026, surfaces every assertion made in the research report alongside the relevant source passages and pointers for��additional��research — giving attorneys everything they need to��verify��before anything goes out the door.��Litigation Document Analyzer��goes further��by��identifying��potential misrepresentations of law throughout an entire brief, your own or opposing counsel’s. Because in litigation, what a document implies about the law matters just as much as what it explicitly says.��

Every one of these capabilities exists for the same reason: because when you use AI to do legal work, you are still the one responsible for it.����

The Question Every Lawyer Should Be Asking��

Not all legal AI is built the same way.��Some tools are little more than general-purpose foundation models with a legal label applied — with little ability to confirm whether the underlying sources are current, authoritative, or accurately represented in the answer.��They can be fast. They can be impressive in a demo. But when a client’s matter is on the line and a judge is asking questions, impressive in a demo is not the standard that matters.��

At ��������,��fiduciary‑grade��AI is our standard for how AI should work in��high‑stakes professions.����It’s AI designed for professionals – built on our authoritative content; protected by rigorous privacy and security safeguards; shaped and validated by subject‑matter��experts; and designed to produce transparent outputs that can be verified.����

We’ve spent decades earning the trust of the legal profession. That history shaped how we built CoCounsel Legal. When your firm is evaluating which AI tools to adopt, the conversation about speed and efficiency matters. But it shouldn’t be the only conversation. Ask how the system handles accuracy. Ask what happens when you need to trace an output back to its source. Ask whether you can actually verify what it produces before your name goes on it. Those questions will tell you everything you need to know about whether a tool was built for legal work or just marketed to it.��

Lawyers have always been accountable for what they put their names on. The right AI gives you the tools to meet that accountability — and the confidence to know you have.

These conversations are more important than ever as generative AI becomes more widely implemented across the legal industry. As our customers’ – and their clients’ – expectations change, it’s crucial that we’re closely aligned with their collective needs.����

With this mind, �������� and Lexpert hosted a featuring law firm leaders and industry experts discussing the challenges and trends around the use of generative AI in the legal profession. Below are insights from an engaging and informative discussion.��

Lawyers are excited to implement generative AI solutions��

Law firms may not have a reputation as early adopters of technology, yet many firms are already using generative AI solutions. David Cohen, senior director, client service delivery, McCarthy Tétrault, noted his firm’s response when it rolled out CoCounsel, the professional-grade GenAI assistant, a year ago.  ��

​“We put a call out for people to sign up and get a license, and the 175 seats were immediately filled,” Cohen said. “There was a wait list where people were pleading to get access to the tool – there’s certainly a lot of interest and excitement at our firm.” ��

Panelists noted how firms are increasingly implementing AI for drafting legal documents as well as for predictive analytics and other complex tasks.��

Cohen said McCarthy Tétrault is using AI for higher-value work, including in litigation matters to scan data troves and identify where the firm has been successful in the past.  ��

​“We’re very interested in how we get a strategic advantage,” Cohen said. “What arguments were used, what makes for a successful pleading – that’s something we can leverage.”  ��

​Rikin Morzaria, principal at Kinara Law, said he’s “experimenting with and finding solutions that work long term,” including using AI for advanced tasks such as drafting memos or reviewing his own work to identify potential areas for improvement.��

​“I treat it as something that would be submitted by a student or an intern, that needs to be reviewed again,” Morzaria said. “It ultimately produces a better product for me in the end.”��

​Unfounded concerns about robot lawyers��

Panelists shared their perspectives on generative AI solutions augmenting, not replacing, humans.��

“AI doesn’t have human insight or instincts, it doesn’t know the client, it can’t read a room,” said Valerie McConnell, senior director of CoCounsel Customer Success at ��������. “How lawyers allocate their time will shift: the hope and expectation is when we clear their plates, they’ll have the space to think about strategic angles.”��

​This brought up how firms’ use of AI is changing talent management. Cohen noted that McCarthy Tétrault revamped its training program to incorporate the integration of AI into its workflows and processes.��

​“Having best-in-class prompts that are shared and available to our lawyers is something we certainly weren’t discussing a couple years ago,” Cohen said.  ��

​Changing billing practices and elevating services��

Panelists noted that generative AI is changing how lawyers bill their clients. They discussed an example of litigators relying more on flat-fee billing because they know they can handle certain aspects of a matter more quickly.  ��

​“Your time in a discovery, trial, or mediation won’t change, but a lot of that time leading up to it will,” Morzaria said. “That allows you to work more efficiently and take on work that may not have been feasible before.”  ��

Panelists also shared how generative AI is helping firms elevate their services. They called out how firms in the litigation space are using it to surface key evidence, while firms on the transactional side are using it for contract review.����

Managing and mitigating risks��

Panelists discussed how firms are addressing concerns around emerging technologies including accuracy and privacy. Cohen noted firms are focusing on “achieving the right balance where we’re generating benefits for our clients but also managing and mitigating the risks.”����

McConnell emphasized that AI is not a replacement for a lawyer’s oversight. She recommended that firms create an AI policy, use a secure software platform that allows lawyers to easily verify output and doesn’t train on firm data, and provide employee training on responsible AI use.  ��

Generative AI is shaping the future of law, and its impact on the legal profession will be even greater in 2025 and beyond. As the market matures, legal professionals will not just desire but require AI capabilities for their workflows. Innovative firms at the forefront, including Kinara Law and McCarthy Tétrault, are best positioned to capitalize on the potential of this transformative technology to better serve their clients.��

​Check out highlights of the panelists’ conversation and listen to their full discussion .��

This is a guest post from Raghu Ramanathan, president, Legal Professionals, ��������.��

1. Lawyer productivity gains are boosted by technology

In Q2 2024, for the first time in years, a majority of law firms experienced productivity growth. In Q3, a whopping 64% of law firms reported productivity growth, building on the gains seen in Q2.

“The continued climb in law firm average productivity – in stark contrast to previous years – is a key factor boosting law firm profitability,” said Raghu Ramanathan, president of Legal Professionals, ��������. “Law firms that not only invest in new technology but also adopt AI and generative AI solutions to streamline workflows and improve the efficiency and quality of their work will be best positioned to improve client satisfaction and experience sustained productivity growth.”

2. Demand continues to rise

Overall demand for legal services is up by a solid 3.6% compared to the same quarter last year. Leading the charge are counter-cyclical practices, with litigation demand up by 4.0% and labor & employment not far behind at 2.9%. Real estate led the growth in transactional practices, up 3.7%. The balanced growth across practice areas indicates a more sustainable expansion than what law firms experienced during the post-pandemic boom.

3. Both full-time equivalent headcount and productivity are up

Q3 2024 was the first time in three years that law firms increased both their full-time equivalent headcount and productivity. While there’s been a slight uptick in expenses – 5.7% for direct and 5.3% for overhead – the modest hiring rate compared to the boom years of 2021 and 2022 is helping firms keep these costs in check.

4. Stable economy provides ideal growth environment

The strong performance for law firms was supported by a stable and healthier-than-expected U.S. economy. Despite earlier concerns about sustained inflation and slow economic growth, the economic environment has provided a foundation for law firms to thrive. Law firms are positioned for a strong close to 2024.

Download the full report for additional insights on the factors shaping the future of law firm profitability and productivity.

From an innovation perspective, the growth in lawyer productivity is a top takeaway.

“Law firms’ recovering productivity rates may be an early indicator of the impact AI and generative AI tools are having on their ability to streamline workflows and free up lawyers for more strategic activities,” said Raghu Ramanathan, president, Legal Professionals, ��������.

Lawyer productivity growth turned positive – coming in at 0.4% – for the first time since the transactional boom of Q4 2021, when pandemic lockdowns were ending and the U.S. economy was strong. In Q2 2024, 54% of firms had lawyers billing more hours compared to Q2 2023.

Other notable figures from the report

• Growth in overall demand was led by the counter-cyclical practices of litigation – which grew at 3.4% – followed by bankruptcy, up 2.4%, and labor & employment, up 2.2%.
• Demand for transactional practices, which includes general corporate, M&A, real estate and tax practices, returned to growth mode for law firms after almost three years of subpar performance. Transactional fees worked – a proxy for revenue – saw the greatest Q2 resurgence of any cyclical practice group, driven by increased billing rates.
• Worked rate growth was at 6.6%, up from 6.4% in Q1, which saw the fastest Q1 pace of growth since the Great Financial Crisis.

For more insights, read the press release or download a copy of the Q2 2024 LFFI report.

For legal professionals filing a lawsuit, defending a lawsuit, or advising clients on potential liability, often their first step is to identify applicable claims or counterclaims. Yet not all claims are equal. Some causes of action have a lower threshold to achieve, some provide for attorneys’ fees or higher damages, and some fit better with the facts of a particular case.

In testing with attorneys, those who used the new skill found relevant causes of action three times faster than when using traditional research methods. In addition, in reviewing Am Law 50 litigation where claims were added after the initial pleadings, the new skill found 94% of the claims that were missed in the initial pleadings and later added by the firms.

“Finding claims with traditional research methods can be difficult and time consuming,” said Mike Dahn, head of Westlaw Product Management, ��������. “Even experienced lawyers can miss applicable claims. Customers have told us about the difficulty of claims research for years, and it’s not just that it can take hours – it’s error prone, which is easy to see in how often reputable firms attempt to add new claims or counterclaims later in litigation, after the initial pleadings. But courts won’t always allow you to add a claim later, and missing the best claims can have significant consequences. It can mean the difference between winning or losing a motion, recovering more in damages or attorney’s fees, or potentially losing a case.”

Dahn added this new skill was purpose-built using the latest generative AI plus new claims content created by �������� attorney editors. “When we tried to solve claims research issues with AI alone, it didn’t work very well, so we had our attorney editors create new content about causes of action that enabled AI to work much better. We’ll continue to do work like this for other workflows where AI alone struggles.”

The new skill is the latest milestone in the �������� expanded vision for CoCounsel – the professional-grade GenAI assistant – to enable professionals to seamlessly complete complicated work involving multiple products through a single generative AI assistant.

For more on the new skill, check out .