Advertise on podcast: ABA Journal Podcasts - Legal Talk Network

The last few weeks have brought some pretty scary headlines when it comes to artificial intelligence. OpenAI admitted to hacking into government databases in Australia, and that several of its AI agents went rogue and probed three U.S. government websites over the summer. Another AI agent tried to hack into a Canadian government website. And, of course, there was the really scary headline from a few weeks ago, when Anthropic researchers acknowledged that AI could kill us all by the end of the decade. Does AI need guardrails and, if so, how should those guardrails look and what can lawyers do to try to push AI toward a more beneficial outcome for humanity?

Have you been injured in a car accident? Or hurt on the job? Or had a bad reaction to some drug? If you’re a plaintiffs lawyer, chances are that you’ve uttered some variation of those words—either in a commercial or on a highway billboard. Then when calls come in, you have to evaluate them to see whether they’re worth taking on contingency. If they go forward, then there’s discovery, depositions, motion practice, investigations and a lot of other work to get a case ready for trial—even though most of the time, cases end up settling out of court. That’s been the traditional path for most plaintiffs lawyers.

Have you heard about artificial intelligence-native law firms? The potential time savings are astronomical and could maybe even upend the traditional billable hour. But the drawbacks are also real.

In the past few years, more and more states have been considering or implementing different pathways to the bar that involve hands-on work in real-world legal practices that is evaluated by bar examiners. How each state’s program works varies, but many involve law students or graduates working with supervision in legal deserts, helping to ease access-to-justice issues, as well.

Defined as the practice of using artificial intelligence tools to create software through verbal prompts and then having the AI write the underlying code based on those prompts, vibe coding has plenty of applications and implications for lawyers. Lawyers can create all sorts of programs and applications to help make them more productive. But of course, with any powerful technological tool, there are some risks and things you should be careful of.

Arbitration has emerged as a faster, more streamlined option for parties looking to resolve disputes. The emergence of generative artificial intelligence has supercharged arbitration even more.

Most lawyers probably have bad memories of high school physics and would rather get held in contempt of court than learn about quantum mechanics. They might change their tune when they learn about the potential and promise of quantum computing.

If you look at this year’s ABA Techshow advertising material, you could be forgiven for thinking that you were reading a comic book. Between the cartoon-style illustrations and the comic book-style captions and headings on the brochure and website, it’s clear what motif that the Techshow planners were going for was. Perhaps that’s appropriate, given how quickly generative artificial intelligence tools have established a foothold in the legal industry. Like a superhero—or perhaps more accurately, a superhero’s sidekick—AI has helped save the day for a lot of lawyers.

Let’s talk about every lawyer’s favorite subject: exams. It seems like every day, there’s another threshold that generative artificial intelligence crosses. First, it was able to take a bar exam and do reasonably well. Then it was able to ace it. Same with law school exams. Right now, AI would probably graduate at the top of its class, edit law review and land a six-figure associate’s job with an Am Law 50 firm. Now comes another milestone.

In 2025, we saw greater adoption of generative artificial intelligence tools across all areas of the legal industry. Will 2026 bring more of the same? Or will there be a backlash or reaction of some sort? What about the regulatory landscape for AI? Will 2026 bring federal guidelines, or will we have to wait for 2027 or beyond?

All in all, it’s shown that the legal industry, traditionally known as a staid, conservative and risk-averse profession, is undergoing a period of rapid change and transformation.

According to an October report from the Association of Corporate Counsel, generative AI use among in-house lawyers has more than doubled over the last year. More than half of respondents are now actively using generative AI in their practice—compared to only 23% in 2024. The survey also said two-thirds of respondents are using it so that they can eventually rely less on outside counsel, and over 60% are likely to push for a change in how legal services are priced.

As Halloween swiftly approaches, we’ve conjured up a classic from the Modern Law Library crypt. What do zombies and pirates have to do with the law? Grab your candy and find out as host Lee Rawles is joined by Paul Golden, author of Litigating Adverse Possession Cases: Pirates v. Zombies.  —---- “Trespassing plus time equals adverse possession,” Paul Golden writes in his new book, Litigating Adverse Possession Cases: Pirates v. Zombies. When someone has occupied or used a piece of property as though they own it for long enough, a court could determine that they are the rightful owner—regardless of what the paperwork says. It’s a concept more popularly discussed as squatter’s rights. In this episode of The Modern Law Library, Golden speaks with the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles about the ancient concepts underlying modern adverse possession law; some quirky state laws; and why societies would allow land to be transferred in this way. They also discuss how the plain meaning of terms like “hostile” are changed when used in adverse possession cases, and Rawles raises a hypothetical—taken from real life—of a neighbor’s crooked fence. During Golden’s first appearance on The Modern Law Library, he explained how the lack of a written contract could be navigated by a savvy lawyer. In his new book, Golden guides attorneys and their clients through the finer points of arguing for and against adverse possession claims. He shares some of the errors he’s seen pop up in adverse possession cases, and offers advice for how to avoid common pitfalls.

When Clio announced that it had acquired global legal research platform vLex for $1 billion in June, it was the latest in a series of big moves from the cloud-based practice management software company.

As the Supreme Court returns to the bench, we’re raising a glass to a favorite from our archives. In this episode, Nancy Maveety shares stories from Glass and Gavel, where cocktails meet constitutional law. ----- From the earliest days of the U.S. Supreme Court, alcohol has been part of the work lives and social lives of the justices. In the book “Glass and Gavel: The U.S. Supreme Court and Alcohol,” Nancy Maveety takes readers on a tour through the ways that SCOTUS and spirits have overlapped. In this episode of the Modern Law Library, she speaks with the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles about how she came to write this in-depth history. While the Prohibition Era would immediately spring to mind, the court faced a number of cases involving alcohol that impacted commerce, advertising, criminal justice and even gender discrimination laws. Maveety, who in addition to being a scholar of constitutional law also studies mixology, shares how she selected a signature cocktail for each chief justice’s tenure. She also has a drink suggestion for readers which incorporates an ingredient that’s known to be one of Justice Ginsburg’s favorites–and a cautionary tale about a normally teetotaling chief justice who dropped dead after sipping a sherry.