Wednesday, June 8, 2016

The First Serial Legal Entrepreneur Strikes Again: Gary Sangha, Intelligize Founder Launches LexCheck: Computational Linguistics for Legal Drafting

Most of the exciting new products I have seen in the past year have offered visualization or analytics features. I shouldn't be surprised that Gurinder "Gary"  Sangha has resurfaced with a product that focuses on text rather than data. He has a decidedly contrarian history.  In an earlier post I explored  his launch of the highly successful Intelligize product at the height of the financial crisis where it was a late entry into an overcrowded market of products built around SEC filings and regulation. I nearly groaned at the prospect of seeing yet another SEC product trying to take share from 10K Wizard, Securities Mosaic and  Westlaw Business.... what could possibly crack that market? Sangha had managed to develop a product driven by algorithms which untangled and sorted and paired streams of SEC correspondence, No Action Letters and comments which were painfully unintelligible using standard Boolean keyword search or normal filters. Intelligize exposed  a web of relationships between documents and offered lawyers a "time rebate"- less time searching and sorting meant  more time for  high level analysis.

Sangha is a former AmLaw 100  associate (Shearman & Sterling and White & Case) who left the practice of law in 2007. As CEO of Intelligize he developed a product which has been adopted by most of the Amlaw 100 firms. After stepping down as Intelligize CEO in 2013 , Sangha pursued a more traditional legal dream of returning to his alma mater Penn Law to teach business law. He was recently appointed a Fellow at CodeX, The Stanford Center for Legal Informatics and was profiled in Crain's New York Business 40 Under 40.

Although Sangha had been a corporate lawyer his new venture is a product called LexCheck  which was inspired by litigation. Sangha was appalled that the fate of the Affordable Care Act was being derailed by textual ambiguity. The case of King v Burwell  had  reached the US Supreme Court because of the phrase "exchanges established by the state." Did  that phrase refer only to insurance exchanges established by individual states or  did it include the exchange established by  the federal government?  This was of course not the first instance of a legislative drafting error resulting in litigation, but it was the case that launched Sangha into his next tech venture with a company called LitIQ. Sangha went around the country talking to leading computational linguists about developing a technology to remedy legal drafting errors. He assembled a team of technologists and computational linguists who came together to build a new product called LexCheck.

Diagnosing  Lawyer Errors.  Sangha wanted to solve a "big issue" in the legal sector. The "issue" he has taken on is "human error."  Sangha learned that according to the ABA 45% of malpractice claims arise from substantive errors, drafting errors. ambiguous language, language omissions or conflicting language. When a lawyer makes an error, he will face adversarial interpretations.

The Diagnostics of LexCheck

Lexcheck is a diagnostic software that detects unnecessary ambiguities, errors and inconsistencies in contracts, patents, regulations and other legal documents. LexCheck will quickly enable lawyers to diagnose errors in their own documents before they are sent to a client or counterparty. 

LexChek offers 3 main features:

1) Ambiguity detection. The English language is full of ambiguities.The "ambiguity detection" tool can identify both semantic and syntactic ambiguities.  For example: "I saw her duck" has two completely different meanings. Does "she' have a pet duck? Or did "she" take evasive action?

2. Style Manual. LexCheck incorporates the Ken Adams Manual, of Style for Contract Drafting.
Certain words always cause trouble. Instead of using  "biennial," or " biannual" the style guide recommends "every two years." The style guide can be customized with "firm specific" rules.

3. Proofreader.  Sangha knows first hand from his Intelligize experience that the average  length of a merger agreement has doubled over the past 15 years. This increases both the risk of a mistake and the "mind-numbing"pain of reviewing such documents for internal inconsistencies. Cost conscious clients don't want to pay for proofreading. Associates are terrified of "career ending" oversights.

The Value Proposition

 Sangha sums up LexChek's value proposition in a single illustration. LexChek, Saves time and money while mitigating the risk of damage to the reputation of a lawyer or the firm or damaging client relationships.

What's Next
According to Sangha LexChek is available on the market and has already been adopted by several ALM 100 firms. The cost of licenses will be scaled to the practice group size. Right now the product is ready for the transactional market. A version for litigators is under development. I can't think of any product that combines all of the features offered by LexCheck. Thomson Reuters Transactional Drafting assistant has similar proofreading capabilities but not the ambiguity detection.

Competitive Analysis in Your Future? While the primary focus is  on helping lawyers improve the quality of their own work, it is clear that this product could also have a "competitive analysis" function by identifying weaknesses in an adversaries documents or contested legislation or regulations.

Could LexCheck Have an A2J Impact?
I am a big fan of legal entrepreneurs. I  certainly wish Sangha success in his venture...  I also can't help but hope that the product is so successful, it can be adopted by every legislature in the US.  Access to justice is impaired by the sheer volume of litigation. If LexCheck were run on all legislation in the US, could this not have cumulative benefit on access to justice by reducing some volume of litigation? More importantly it could assure that  all legislation is more comprehensible to the general public -- those who can't afford lawyers to fight over common legislative drafting errors such as ambiguities,  omissions and grammatical errors which impact the interpretation of a law.

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Content Clutter and the High Cost of Low Cost Alternatives: AALL Responds to Outsourcing Articles

American Association of Law LibrariesIn response to the recent American Lawyer article on the outsourcing of law libraries, AALL President Keith Ann Stiverson released a statement today which underscored the important role which information professionals play in 21st century law firms. Stiverson recognized the value of limited, targeted outsourcing but warned of risks and hidden costs arising from the wholesale outsourcing of all information services to a third party. Information management is more important now than at any time in history. 
 Stiverson's statement included some interesting data on "content clutter."
"Every two days society creates as much information as it did from the
beginning of time until 2003.On an annual basis, content clutter costs businesses about 500 hours of time per employee. Information professionals cut this cost by effectively managing content for the firm, keeping them competitive in this information driven economy."
The statement concluded by urging firms to calculate the total cost of outsourcing including an assessment of risk to the business before considering the wholesale outsourcing of all information support and intelligence functions.
Read the full statement here here.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Throwing Law Firm Intelligence Out with the Books?

Today American Lawyer posted an article about what the author  described as a "growing trend in law library outsourcing."  Nuance doesn’t grab headlines, and this article raises more questions than it answers.  A  few key clarifications are in order.  Are law firms throwing away institutional intelligence instead of just tossing the books? Will they pay a high price later for a short term savings?


1. Outsourcing is not new – I suspect that 100% of ALM 200 firms engage in some level of outsourcing, looseleaf filing, cataloging,  document retrieval and repetitive technical processes are the processes which are most commonly outsourced. Functions involving deep, specialized knowledge and  high levels of expertise are not.

2. Outsourcing is not unique to law libraries - many large law firms have outsourced lower level repetitive work  from many different departments including HR, IT, conflicts, marketing, accounting.  The key metrics which determine whether to outsource a job are: the complexity of the work, a short learning curve, high repetition, low decision making authority. Outsourced positions anticipate high turnover  with low impact on service in order to maintain savings.

3. Most importantly... What exactly do they mean by "law library?" Are any two people  in the article talking about the same thing when they refer to” law libraries.”?

Is Your Law Library a Time Capsule? 30 years ago most law libraries operated according to a fairly standard template focused mostly on maintaining print resources, overseeing book circulation, routing  newsletters and magazines. Research support  was generally confined to “ready reference fact checking.”

Since 1986 the spectrum of  services offered by information professionals has exploded as they have taken the lead introducing firms to online research, the internet, Knowledge Management, analytics, competitive intelligence, project management and listening platforms. Sadly there are firms and law librarians who have perpetuated the “time capsule version of a 1986  law library.” Clearly law firms who have failed to hire strategic knowledge leaders will find the savings offered by an outsourced solution very attractive– but this doesn’t mean that the lawyers will be getting what they need to compete in the 21st century knowledge economy.

Is Your Law Library an Intelligence "Force Multiplier?" Most ALM 200 firms are well down the road to eliminating print, automating operations and outsourcing or eliminating repetitive low level work. Any firm that has not begun these transformations is way behind the curve. Before law firms jump on the outsourcing band wagon leaders and partners should do some “soul searching” and consider  what kind strategic information support they currently offer to their lawyers and what kind of intelligence they want to integrate into  their business and legal work processes to compete in the 21st century.

I have observed at least 3 different tiers of legal information support in ALM 200 law firms and there are probably more.  But for purposes of assessing the value of “outsourcing” to an organization you need to define the central idea of the “law library.” What kind of support does your firm offer now and what kind of support do you need to maintain a competitive edge?

Low tier.  A basic library. Supports the management of print and electronic resources. Provides reactive, basic legal research. 

Middle Tier. Research and Intelligence Center. Provides proactive legal and business intelligence and complex legal  and business research services,  in-depth research analytics. Oversees the organization wide content acquisition  strategy informing  management and business decisions. Offers  a wide range of services including KM, competitive intelligence, practice aligned support, practice  portals and key client portals. Director/CKO assures that information polices mitigate ethical risks. 

Top Tier. Strategic Knowledge Services . Director or CKO oversees integration of workflow and resources  functions including research services, conflicts, dockets, records, intranet, competitive intelligence, knowledge management. Investigates emerging technologies, AI, machine learning, process improvement and advises firm on  development of integrated desktop workflow solutions.

Open Questions?

 It is not at all clear how an outsider, even if given a “Director” title with no "seat at the management table" can help a law firm build out their 21st century knowledge enabled desktops and workflows.

 Information professionals are in demand across a wide spectrum of jobs in the emerging fields of competitive intelligence, pricing, process improvement and data analytics, so positions in marginalized “library” operations are unlikely to offer an attractive career option for innovative information professionals. Who will want to take these jobs?

Let‘s be frank  there are law firms which have tolerated law libraries staffed by "book tenders" which are rightly at risk for drastic measures such as 100% outsourcing... and then there are firms who had the foresight to hire professional knowledge strategists who have spent the past decade transforming law libraries into strategic intelligence units that are driving competitive insights and analytics through all legal and business processes. It is one thing to throw out the books and another to throw out the information professionals who act as "force multipliers" in assuring that the firm always knows more and looks smarter than their clients or the competition.

SEE ALSO Greg Lambert's response to the American Lawyer article on 3 Geeks and a Law : Law firm libraries can not simply be a service: they need to be a strategic partner.

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Free Webinar on Checklists for Lawyers: Roadmaps for Accuracy & Completeness"

On Thursday May 29th, at noon est., the ABA, Law Practice Management, Knowledge Strategy Interest Group is offering the 5th in a series of free webinars. Register here
Checklists in the practice of law are not merely "to do lists. The best checklists for improving efficiency in legal practice are more like roadmaps which provide nuanced and experience guidance. This webinar will discuss law to draft effective roadmaps for lawyers at all skill levels.
Discussion will cover:
  • Examples pf roadmaps that work in large and small practices
  • How roadmaps can enhance efficiency in staffing matters.
  • Roadmaps vs standardize forms: Why roadmaps are superior and provide greater flexibility and minimize risk.
  • Substance vs process: How are do substantive and procedural roadmaps differ? Why do  you need both?
  • How to get start drafting effective roadmaps?
  • Using roadmaps to kick start a firmwide efficiency programs.


Jack Bostelman ( moderator)
President KM/JD Consulting LLC and Chait of ABA Knowleldge Stratetgy Interest Group

Thomas H. Kennedy
Partner, Golabl Head of Knowledge Strategy. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York

Daniel J Siegel
Managing Partner, Law office of Daniel J Siegel, LLC and Co- Author, Checklists for Lawyers (American Bar Association 2014

Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Tax Cheetah! Wolters Kluwer Unveils New Research Platform for Tax Practitioners: Responsive Design and Personalization Rule!

Today Wolters Kluwer Law and Business is announcing the release of  “Cheetah for Tax.” Ben Snipes the Product Line Director for Tax provided me with a preview of the new platform. The Cheetah Tax Product has a clean intuitive look and  offers a boatload of new functionality.  The U.S. tax code has been the rigid backbone of all prior tax products. That backbone is this there, Cheetah also offers flexible alternative approaches to research. Cheetah offers a high level personalization as well as a variety of options for search, navigation and display.

Today’s press release quotes Dean Sonderegger, Vice President & GM, Legal Markets Group:  “With Cheetah we built a platform that is specifically designed to support the attorney workflow and we will continue to add new capabilities and practice areas to this platform to help a new generation of attorneys re-envision the way they work.”

The Code Rules CCH has held a firm grip on Tax research for over 150 years. When CCH launched their original tax product in 1913, it was considered rather revolutionary, offering weekly news of  regulatory updates (by mail.)  For most of that time the Internal Revenue Code was the central organizing principle of all tax research. Wolters Kluwer/CHH has been chasing the right technology for decades. They migrated from the multi-volume print  Standard Federal Tax Reporter, to cd-rom, to online dial-up , to web based (and much maligned) Intelliconnect and now Cheetah for Tax.

Cheetah for Tax  is the second product to launch on the Cheetah platform.  The Securities law product was released in 2015. Cheetah is not a revision of Intelliconnect—It is a whole new platform. The Cheetah team took the 7.5 million tax documents from Intelliconnect and de-duped,  re-coded and enriched each document with meta data. A major goal was to move beyond the book paradigm and allow lawyers to cluster  all related content, no matter where it was originally published.

Although tax lawyers can continue or organize their research around tax code sections, in Cheetah they have many more options. Topic, Entity type (LLC, partnerships, nonprofits etc.), jurisdiction, subject can be selected for inclusion on a personalized “home page” or used as filters.
The Cheetah Home Page - Before Personalization
Cool Tools: Cheetah is loaded with new functionality:

  • ·         There is prominent citation search box in the right corner.
  • ·         Content includes, primary law, analysis, legislative history  and news.
  • ·         All of the Smartcharts have been migrated.
  •        All of a subscribers content can be accessed from home page.
  • ·         Customize the page to see only what you want. Select code sections, topics and jurisdictions of importance to you.What you use will be there in one click.
  • ·         All the quick reference tools are in the same location on each page.
  • ·         Red envelope – give feedback. Send your recommendations directly to Editor Ben Snipes.
  • ·         Seach across all subscribed content: federal, international and state and local.
  • ·         International content covers 270 jurisdictions which can be both searched and compared by country using “smart charts.”.
  • ·         Entity type search allows a lawyer to focus on tax impact on an LLC, partnership a corporation, nonprofit?
  • ·         “Content flags” Tell you clearly what kind of content you are looking at e.g. a statute, a temporary regulation, a treatise. This feature assures that a new lawyer always understands what kind of document they are reviewing. It clearly shows which documents have the force of law and which are interpretive.
  • ·         A-Z lists are coming so lawyers can navigate to a specific titles.
International Smartcharts

Existing Subscribers: All Intelliconnect subscribers will have the option to migrate to Cheetah or remain on the Intelliconnect platform. They will see all the same CCH and Aspen content which was availableto them  on Intelliconnect.

Will Cheetah entice the majority of print Standard Federal Tax Reporter subscribers to give up their books?  Since Cheetah  will offer both the code structure and  topical research, they  will now be clearly in direct competition with  RIA Checkpoint from Thomson Reuters which offers a topical approach to tax research. Will more tax lawyers be willing to go will a single online source since Cheetah offers both topical and code views?

Wolters Kluwer along with their competitors, Thomson Reuters, LexisNexis and BloombergBNA are in a fierce competition to control practitioners desktops by offering not only content but workflow enhancements.The winners are the lawyers who can count on the continuing development of faster, better and more integrated desktop tools like Cheetah.

More information at: Cheetah For Tax Law

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Practice Point: Thomson Reuters Promises "Trusted Answsers" and Workflow Tools For the Transactional Lawyer.

Frankly I was surprised and somewhat baffled when Thomson Reuters announced the release of Practice Point several months ago. At first glance it seemed to be a slimmed down version of Practical Law. Why two different products? Where does it fit on a lawyer’s desktop?  How does it relate to Westlaw?

I spent some time talking to Craig Vaughn, the  product's Strategy Manager  and Mindy Sciarini, Senior strategy associate  and exploring Practice Point on my own.  According to Vaughn, Practice Point is designed to provide transactional lawyers with "trusted answers in one place."

Over the past few years I have written several posts noting that all the major legal publishers ( TR, LexisNexis, Bloomberg BNA  and Wolters Kluwer) were evolving from providing " pure content" to offering content woven with process. Research products were sprouting workflow tools. Practice Point is not an outgrowth of Westlaw. The original West Publishing Company  which created the National Reporter System  for legal research had a slogan  “forever associated with the practice of law.” Westlaw, their online product, could have had a corollary slogan: “forever associated with the practice of litigation.” 

Therein lay the problem for Thomson Reuters. Westlaw had been built around caselaw and no matter how much corporate content they added, corporate lawyers viewed Westlaw as a caselaw research system built around the needs and workflows of litigators. Even though Westlaw was loaded with corporate treatises, commentary, forms, corporate profiles and business information, there was no easy way for transactional lawyers to locate and retrieve  useful practice resources buried in the terabytes of Westlaw data.Westlaw executives have been puzzling over this challenge for more than a decade.

After Thomson Corporation (TR's predecessor company) purchased Global Securities Information in 2005, I recall Thomson executives suggesting that GSI content would be used develop a new product focused on the needs of transactional lawyers. They rebranded GSI as Westlaw Business which launched at the dawn of the great recession. The product  faced a shrinking market and client dismay at higher prices for the same SEC focused content.  (I will forego a retelling of the  complete Westlaw Business saga.)

Then in 2013 Thomson Reuters acquired Practical Law Company, a UK based "know how" product which  is bursting with transactional practice expertise, clauses, checklists and commentary.  Practical Law offers an exhaustive topical approach with encyclopedic depth.  Practice Advisor, by contrast, is selective and organized around workflow.  Practical Law contains transactional workflow tools. Practice Point was built to BE  a transactional workflow tool.

It has taken them a while, but  Thomson Reuters has finally succeeded in creating product tailored to the workflows and content needs of transactional and business lawyers. As if to underscore the complete break with Westlaw – Practice Point contains no caselaw!

Leveraging Thomson Reuters Assets
Practice Point was designed to leverage content from across the wide landscape of Westlaw assets including: statutes, news,  company information, market trends, regulatory materials, treatises and SEC filings. Practice Point is not simply a curated version of Practical Law it is a curated version of all Thomson Reuters assets which can  help a  transactional practitioner.  Practice Point organizes 2,000 tasks across multiple practice areas and in-house counsel projects.  Practice Point attorney - editors curated each  task, form, statute, comment etc. from millions of resources across Thomson Reuters repositories. The platform uses a menu structure by practice area and task to enable lawyers to quickly pinpoint what they need to do. Although menus are the primary form of access, the product is also  searchable using the traditional West search algorithm.

Practice areas include: antitrust arbitration capital markets and corporate governance, commercial transactions, corporate M&A, employee benefits and executive compensation, federal civil practice, finance, IP and technology, labor and employment, and real estate. There is also an section on In-House Counsel tasks e.g. launching a product.
One of the main goals was to offer a product which mirrored attorney workflow. Tasks are structured around the way attorneys approach problems. The menu driven structure allows lawyers to select subtopics within a workflow. For example, if an attorney is looking to structure a business organization they can read background materials, review checklists, drafting material, templates, commentary, forms and secondary sources. I do have one criticism. Some of the standard forms did not display well. Since they have curated forms which originally appeared in treatises... the forms look like, well... pages of treatises. I hope TR invests in making these forms interactive and visually appealing to a digital user.

The attorney editors for Practice Point have curated and selected what they regard as "the best of the best"  from Practical Law and Westlaw. Practical Law includes over 2,500 practice notes, 4,000 standard documents. Westlaw includes half a million forms and over 5,000 secondary sources.Only the most highly targeted and relevant materials related to specific lawyer tasks and workflows have been incorporated into Practice Point.

Looking at the Corporate M & A page, your can navigate by task type ( Private equity fund, Private M&A, Public M&A  or Browse by content type, (merger agreements, laws, forms, treatises). The center panel contrains daily practice news and Reuters News. The right column includes, What's market, the business law center ( public filings), company search, foreign country Q&A and  corporate related CLE.
Special Features
The Company Investigator from Westlaw which provides an interactive company  family tree.
The”Rulebook Shelf”. Relevant rulebooks enable a lawyer to quickly retrieve laws and regulations relevant to the task at hand. The rulebooks provide a "browse-able" book like experience.

What's market - Offers custom graphics on the fly  including charts, graphs and tables  which show frequency of  key deal terms.

Business Law Center - access public filings from Westlaw Business

State and Country Q & A - check state and foreign country laws and requirements.

Drafting Assistant - the Thomson Reuters drafting tool will be integrated in the near future.

Where's the market?

Thomson Reuters would like to dominate the transactional lawyers desktop the way Westlaw has dominated litigation for decades... But they are not the first to market  in the transactional workflow space.
Practice Point is playing to the process improvement, Lean Six Sigma movement. Firms which are still assessing the cost of building their own practice workflow desktop may find that purchasing Practice Point is a more cost effective and reliable option. Law firm workflow improvement initiatives often depend on a few key staff and can come to an abrupt halt when priorities shift or a key staff member departs. Efficiency is not a luxury in the legal market... it is regarded as "table stakes." So the market is ripe for solutions like Practice Point.

Existing Practical Law subscribers will not be happy about the prospect of  paying a separate subscription for  Practice Point. TR is bound to face some interesting challenges and discussions when they make this pitch. Those of us who have been begging for digital "rulebooks" will be especially annoyed to find that these primary law assets are available on Practice Point but not the more robust Practical Law platform.

Practice Point will be a much easier sell for  firms which are struggling to create "home brewed" workflow tools  and firms which have not yet invested in Practical Law  or its  competitors (Lexis Practice Practice Advisor and BloombergBNA's BloombergLaw: Corporate Transactions).

When Thomson Reuters acquired Practical Law, I speculated that the acquisition would not make sense if  "PLC is to be an island within an ocean of TR content."  I immediately saw opportunities in aligning PLC with the Westlaw Business and  Dealproof (now called Transactional Drafting  Assistant). Well I was wrong. Practical Law was not the convergence point for all of the TR assets...  the convergence point is Practice Point.

Thursday, April 21, 2016

ABA, LMP Knowledge Strategy Subgroup Offers Free Webinar "How to (Re)Start a Practice Efficiency Program"

Project management, Lean Six Sigma, efficiency and workflow optimization are among the hottest buzzwords in law firm management as law firms compete to show clients that they are both smart and lean. If you are confused about where to start, this  upcoming  American Bar Association webinar promises to offer some answers.

The ABA, Law Practice Management, Knowledge Strategy Group is continuing it's "Practice Smarter" Series next week with a webinar: "How to (Re) Start a Practice Efficiency Program."
They have lined up an impressive panel which includes KM "Superstar" Meredith Williams, Chief Knowledge Management Officer at Baker Donelson, in Memphis and Steven G Hastings, Co-Practice Group Leader of Commercial Lending Group (and Knowledge Management and Technology Partner. at Chapman and Cutler in Chicago. Jack Bostelman, a KM consultant and former Partner at Sullivan and Cromwell will moderate the panel.

The program will address critical issues to be considered in projects designed to  optimize lawyer workflow including how to conduct a  needs assessment such  and how to prioritize of projects.

When: April 28, 2016 - 12:00 EST

Register for the webinar here

Prior Practice Smarter Webinars can be viewed here

Here is the full ABA announcement:

Free ABA Webinar

April 28, 12:00 Noon, Eastern (30 mins.)

These free 30-minute webinars show how to practice more efficiently and deliver better value, while improving your financial performance. Our programs feature practical takeaways for individual lawyers, law firms and practice groups. Click here to access past webinars.


April 28, 2016 - 12:00 Noon, Eastern (30 minutes)
You've heard lots of ideas for practice improvement and efficiency projects. Maybe your firm's past efforts have faltered and need a restart. Maybe you haven't tried yet. In either case, which projects should you start with? And how do you get them started?
This program explains:
·         How to conduct a quick needs assessment to learn what efficiency improvements are most needed
·         Why the input should be sought from the practitioners themselves
·         How to prioritize among competing project ideas
·         Why the recommended approach also leads to an improved success rate in implementation
Jack Bostelman (moderator)
President of KM/JD Consulting LLC and Chair of ABA Knowledge Strategy Interest Group. Former partner of Sullivan & Cromwell LLP.  San Francisco
Steven G. Hastings
Co-Practice Group Leader of the Commercial Lending Group (and Knowledge Management and Technology Partner), Chapman and Cutler LLP. Chicago
Meredith L. Williams
Chief Knowledge Management Officer, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC. Memphis
Copyright © 2016 Knowledge Strategy Interest Group, Law Practice Division, American Bar Association, All rights reserved. 
You are receiving this email because you opted in when registering for one of our webinars or subscribed on our website. 

Our mailing address is: 
Knowledge Strategy Interest Group, Law Practice Division, American Bar Association
Attn: Joshua Poje, Director
321 N. Clark Street
Chicago, IL  50564-7598

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list 

Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp