Top trial lawyer John Quinn explains that his firm's exclusive focus on litigation, unlike full-service firms, reduces client conflicts. This unique structure allows them to represent clients against major corporations that other firms might be serving in different capacities (e.g., corporate law, M&A), creating a significant competitive advantage in high-stakes legal battles.
Related Insights
Unlike traditional firms that bill by the hour, personal injury attorneys on contingency fees are highly motivated to adopt AI. Efficiency gains don't reduce billable hours; they directly boost profit margins by settling cases faster and with less manual work, creating clear and immediate ROI.
AI's impact on the legal world is twofold. On one hand, AI tools will generate more lawsuits by making it easier for firms to discover and assemble cases. On the other hand, AI will speed up the resolution of those cases by allowing parties to more quickly analyze evidence and assess the strengths and weaknesses of their positions, leading to earlier settlements.
Instead of selling AI co-pilots, legal tech startup Crosby operates as a full-stack law firm using AI internally. This model allows them to continuously re-orchestrate workflows between human lawyers and AI as models improve. This captures the entire value of automation rather than just the limited margin from selling a software tool to other firms.
Opponents with deep pockets can initiate lawsuits not necessarily to win, but to drain a target's financial resources and create immense stress. The astronomical cost and duration of the legal battle serve as the true penalty, forcing many to fold regardless of their case's merit.
By using AI to respond to discovery requests instantly, plaintiff firms can force defense counterparts, who bill by the hour, to either spend significant time (and client money) responding or settle faster. This tactical use of AI directly exploits and undermines the core business model of their opponents.
Despite the potential for AI to create more efficient legal services, new tech-first law firms face significant hurdles. The established reputation of a major law firm ("the name on the letterhead") sends a powerful signal in litigation. Furthermore, incumbent firms carry malpractice insurance, meaning they assume liability for mistakes—a crucial function AI startups cannot easily replicate.
In the advertising-heavy personal injury law market, John Morgan’s firm wins by being exceptional at trying cases. He claims 95% of competitors are marketers who can't win in court and must settle for less. His firm’s reputation for securing massive verdicts allows them to reject low offers and achieve superior results and margins.
Measuring AI's value by hours saved is misleading for law firms, as it can imply lower revenue. The true ROI comes from what lawyers do with that saved time: pursuing more complex strategies, conducting deeper analysis, and spending more time with clients—high-value work previously constrained by time.
AI legal tech startup Eve targets plaintiff lawyers because their business model (a percentage of the win) is directly aligned with AI's efficiency gains. In contrast, defense firms, which rely on billable hours, face a structural disincentive to adopt tools that reduce the time spent on tasks.
When starting out, don't try to out-expert established players. Instead, compete on access and personal attention. Acknowledge your small size and frame it as a benefit: clients get direct access to you, the founder, which is something large competitors cannot offer.
