New lawyers ordinarily follow the traditional lawyer flowchart:

1. Intern at a law firm or other legal office while you desperately wait for your bar exam results.
2. Promote from intern to associate as a bright-eyed, bushy-tailed, aspiring attorney.
3. Get a reality check as you put in 50 to 60 hours a week (minimum).
4. Pull a couple all-nighters at your desk.
5. Grind away at the office until your hairline recedes or turns grey—or both—at the ripe old age of 35.
6. Watch as the next generation of lawyers do the exact same thing.

But this isn’t always the case—well, at least not for me.

Roughly one year after starting my first job as an associate attorney I unexpectedly found myself at a crossroads in my professional career. As much as I wanted to catch my breath and take my time looking for new opportunities for work, I knew that time was limited. I initially had difficulty finding a position right after being admitted, so the prospect of finding a new job was nerve-wracking. With only a single year of experience under my belt, finding a firm who would hire me felt like an uphill battle—my main concern being that many associate positions are generally filled by interning graduates waiting for bar exam results. After a few days of discussing different options with my wife, my choice was clear: I would have to bet on myself.

Starting your own solo practice is a challenge for any lawyer. Doing so with one year under your belt is borderline reckless, but not impossible. The instant transition from an associate attorney to running your own practice is like jumping into Lake Michigan in March. If you’re a young attorney looking at breaking the mold, here’s three traits you should have and three challenges you will encounter, which I’ve learned after completing my first full year as a solo practicing attorney.

“The instant transition from an associate attorney to running your own practice is like jumping into Lake Michigan in March.”

Trait #1: You Must Learn and Adapt Quickly

Let’s face it—what you learn in law school is only the tip of the iceberg. When you open a private practice early in your career, you are forced to learn every aspect of business management at the same time you are trying to learn the law, providing chaos at every corner. Fortunately, we live in an age where anyone can access the world’s knowledge in seconds, so use that to your advantage.

Use free and readily available resources for your practice such as the ISBA’s legal research tools and the Indiana General Assembly’s online Indiana Code. Additionally, you can use the Indiana Courts' MyCase to find examples of pleadings and motions filed by other lawyers when you’re unsure how to properly draft one.

For understanding the business management side of your practice, there are plenty of online guides that will walk you through website construction, domain maintenance, bookkeeping, and marketing. YouTube is full of educational content that can help you learn these skills. Additionally, software providers like QuickBooks and Clio have guides that answer many questions that first time users may have.

Using artificial intelligence tools can assist in creative endeavors like website design and creating a brand identity, but be cautious when using them for legal work. AI, such as ChatGPT, is prone to using algorithms that use outdated or imitated information—such as using the 2021 Indiana Code instead of the most current version or making up citations that mirror appellate cases from other jurisdictions. However, using well-drafted prompts can help avoid this, such as requiring the AI to “exclusively use external resources and provide links from the websites that the information was gathered from,” forcing it to use more recent information than its older self-contained data model. Regardless, you should always verify all AI generated citations.

Trait #2: You Must Be Procedurally Organized

Note that I didn’t specify “physically” organized. More likely than not your workspace will be a jumbled mess of papers and boxes. Establishing a method to organize the way you want to run your practice is essential, otherwise you risk spiraling into disorganization once you begin to bring in clients. Creating a uniform document naming system is a powerful organization tool allowing you to quickly access your files. Quickly accessing your documents is as important as the content within them. You can’t use what you can’t find.

There is no correct way to organize, but having a system that is easy to teach to future staff or attorneys is an important foresight.

Trait #3: You Must Be Flexible with Clients

Flexibility can be very advantageous for a new attorney. There are people who need legal assistance but can’t find time to meet with an attorney. Not everyone can simply take a day off—often due to work or personal scheduling conflicts. Others, particularly the elderly, have difficulty leaving their homes. By opening yourself up to flexible scheduling, you’re showing dedication to your client by prioritizing their accessibility instead of asking them to disrupt their lives for your convenience. Just remember to set limits on your availability. Your job may seem like your entire life at the onset, but you must care for yourself as well.

“Just remember to set limits on your availability. Your job may seem like your entire life at the onset, but you must care for yourself as well.”

Challenge #1: Overcoming Perceived “Inexperience”

One of the most soul crushing experiences occurred a month into my practice. I was attending an event where I had an information table. During the event, a couple in their early 60s stopped at my table. After learning that I was in the legal field, they curiously asked, “Who is the attorney?”I have been told before that I have a babyface when I am clean shaven, so I chuckled and informed them that I am the attorney. They were visibly surprised by my answer and asked for my age. Thinking nothing of it, I told them that I had just turned 28 and was proud to say that I started my own practice. Their next words hit me like a freight train: “Call us when you’re in your thirties.”

As much as it hurt to hear, I understand their hesitation. But remember that there is a reason that bar exam scores aren’t published—a new lawyer is just as much as a lawyer as one with fifty years of experience. Be aware of your current experience, which may limit which cases you can reasonably take, while recognizing that your abilities will inevitably grow. Appreciate your clients who come to you for their legal needs in the early stages of your practice.

Challenge #2: Isolation

One of the greatest challenges, particularly for extroverts, is the substantial amount of time spent alone.

Being on my own required that I sacrifice everyday social interactions that you would ordinarily have at a firm. Additionally, you will have to deal with professional isolation. A solo practitioner’s opportunities to discuss legal questions with co-workers are essentially nonexistent. I discovered very quickly that cordial connections are critical to a successful practice. Even as a solo practitioner, you can’t do it alone, so find experienced attorneys who will mentor you. Although I don’t have a peer down the hall, I’m extremely thankful for the handful of lawyers who have helped me work through several challenges I’ve faced.

If you are looking to find a mentor, a great place to is your local/county bar association. Reach out to different attorneys and find an hour to have coffee. You may find that some lawyers are involved in volunteer organizations like Lions, Kiwanis, or Rotary. The most important step is taking the initiative to interact, even if it seems awkward at first. There are experienced lawyers who would be glad to help develop the skills of green lawyers.

Challenge #3: Overcoming Financial Pressures

Managing finances is a necessity for any business. What is more challenging is meeting your personal financial needs. You will likely not have enough revenue to pay yourself for months. However, underneath the balance sheet is a more concerning issue: Zealous advocacy can easily become milquetoast when you don’t know if you can meet your own needs. Overcoming this obstacle is not just a test of professional ethics, but evidence of a lawyer’s true character. This is perhaps the greatest obstacle you may face, and there are no easy solutions.

Conclusion

Not everyone can be on their own, and being newly admitted is challenging enough. Neither are easy, but both are possible. You will lose sleep. Your relationships will be challenged. Your self-confidence will falter, and feelings of imposter syndrome will occur. However, the experience and knowledge you gain are unlike any traditional career path, shaping you into the most authentic attorney you could ever hope to be.

Hayden C.T. Parsons is the founding attorney of HCTP Law—a general practice law firm based in Noblesville, Indiana—practicing primarily in the areas of probate, estate planning, business law, and contracts. Since opening his practice in June 2024, Hayden has met the legal needs of individuals and small businesses throughout Indiana and in other states.

Hayden earned his J.D. from the Michigan State University College of Law in 2022, and a B.S. in Political Science from Ball State University in 2019. He was admitted to the Indiana Bar in 2023. Hayden has a passion for helping military veterans and servicemembers, having proudly served in the United States Army Reserve for six years as a Paralegal Specialist, achieving the rank of Sergeant/E-5. Outside of his legal career, Hayden has served on the board of directors for a variety of non-profit organizations, and holds membership in his local Lions Club and Kiwanis Club.

Integrating generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) into law firms presents a transformative opportunity to enhance efficiency, accuracy, and client service. However, this integration must be approached thoughtfully, adhering to ethical guidelines and being mindful of potential risks.

Notable Misuses of Gen AI in Law

In one notorious case, a New York attorney faced sanctions after submitting a legal brief that cited non-existent cases generated by ChatGPT. The lawyer admitted to not verifying the authenticity of these citations, leading to a $5,000 fine and a mandate to inform affected clients about the misconduct.

Similarly, a Texas lawyer was fined $2,000 for filing a document containing fictitious citations produced by an AI tool. The court also required the attorney to complete a course on the ethical use of generative AI in legal settings.

These cases underscore the ethical and professional risks associated with unverified reliance on Gen AI outputs. They highlight the necessity for attorneys to exercise due diligence and maintain human oversight when incorporating AI into their practice.

Understanding the American Bar Association's Guidance on Gen AI in Law

In July 2024, the American Bar Association (ABA) issued Formal Opinion 512, providing its first formal guidance on the use of Gen AI in legal practice. The opinion makes it clear that the ethical responsibilities outlined in the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct remain as relevant and enforceable as ever in the context of this emerging technology. This guidance emphasizes that lawyers must fully consider their ethical obligations to ensure Gen AI tools are used responsibly and in a manner that upholds the integrity of the legal profession.

The ABA's Formal Opinion 512 highlights several key Model Rules that lawyers must heed when integrating Gen AI into their practice:

1. Competence (Model Rule 1.1): Lawyers are required to provide competent legal representation, which involves having the requisite legal knowledge, skill, and thorough preparation. When using Gen AI tools, this means understanding both the benefits and risks of the technology. A lawyer must possess sufficient technical competence to evaluate whether a particular Gen AI tool is suitable for the task at hand and ensure it is used effectively. This includes verifying the accuracy of Gen AI outputs, as errors or fabricated citations—commonly referred to as "hallucinations"—can result in serious professional consequences.
2. Confidentiality (Model Rule 1.6): Gen AI systems often require inputting sensitive client information, which raises concerns about maintaining confidentiality. Model Rule 1.6 underscores a lawyer's duty to safeguard all client-related information, regardless of its source. The rule emphasizes that attorneys must ensure the security of any data shared with Gen AI tools and, if there is a lack of protection that risks unauthorized disclosure, must not use such tools without the client's informed consent.
3. Communication (Model Rule 1.4): Effective communication with clients is central to ethical legal practice. Under Model Rule 1.4, lawyers have a fiduciary obligation to inform clients about important developments and to “reasonably consult” with them about the means used to achieve their objectives. In the context of Gen AI, this might mean evaluating whether using the Gen AI tool materially impacts the achievement of client objectives, and if so, informing the client.
4. Fees (Model Rule 1.5): Lawyers must ensure their fees and expenses are reasonable. This extends to the use of Gen AI. If, for example, a lawyer uses a Gen AI tool to draft a document in significantly less time than it would take manually, the lawyer can charge for the time spent reviewing and finalizing the document but, unless the client approves, not for the time spent learning how to operate the tool. However, with appropriate disclosure to the client, the lawyer can, for example, charge a higher fee for more efficient work done using Gen AI, compared to the same work done without using Gen AI. The key is to keep the client informed and get the client’s approval if you plan to change your fees due to Gen AI.

Formal Opinion 512 goes beyond merely restating ethical rules. It encourages lawyers to approach Gen AI with a blend of caution and innovation, recognizing the potential for technology to enhance efficiency and service delivery while safeguarding professional standards. Lawyers are reminded that their ultimate responsibility is to their clients, not the technology. As new Gen AI tools emerge, the ABA anticipates issuing further guidance to address specific tools and scenarios, ensuring the profession evolves responsibly alongside technological advancements. By providing this structured framework, the ABA reinforces that Gen AI is not a shortcut to bypass ethical diligence but a tool that, when used thoughtfully, can complement and enhance traditional legal practices.

Assessing Firm Needs and Capabilities

Before Gen AI enters into operations, a law firm must thoroughly evaluate current practices, staff readiness, and specific needs. I consulted for a mid-sized firm with just under 100 staff, helping them leverage surveys and focus groups to build a data-driven integration strategy. The firm's findings revealed both significant enthusiasm and critical gaps in knowledge and preparedness, offering key insights into how Gen AI can be responsibly and effectively adopted.

We adapted my standardized survey template for law firms on Gen AI to the needs of this firm and then launched the survey. The customized survey revealed that 75% of attorneys viewed Gen AI as a tool with the potential to improve productivity and efficiency, and 55% expressed eagerness to adopt it actively. However, only 25% of the attorneys—no partners, just associates, mostly younger and more digitally savvy—were already using Gen AI, highlighting a substantial 50% gap between interest and usage. Among those who used Gen AI, its applications varied widely. Attorneys reported leveraging Gen AI primarily for drafting and summarizing legal documents, including motions, memos, and agreements. Additionally, some used it for preliminary legal research to identify potentially relevant case law or to refine and improve the readability and conciseness of their written work.

Despite these benefits, the early adopters faced significant challenges. They needed to learn how to fact-check Gen AI to catch fictitious citations or misrepresentations of case law. One attorney shared a detailed account of testing Gen AI for specific state-level legal queries, only to find that the citations provided were inaccurate to their state. This experience reinforced the need for rigorous human oversight when using Gen AI in legal work, particularly for tasks requiring precision and legal interpretation.

The focus groups provided deeper insights into the concerns and expectations of staff. Junior attorneys voiced apprehension about how Gen AI might impact their professional development, particularly the opportunity to hone essential skills through traditional drafting and research tasks. Senior attorneys, meanwhile, expressed skepticism about the technology’s current limitations but acknowledged its potential to reduce time spent on routine tasks. Across the board, employees emphasized a strong desire for comprehensive training, with 100% of non-partners indicating interest in ethical and legal applications of Gen AI and over 90% expressing enthusiasm for practical training on integrating Gen AI into their workflows.

These discussions also uncovered a clear demand for transparency and collaboration in the integration process. Attorneys were keen to understand how Gen AI would complement their roles without diminishing the value of their expertise. While 75% of respondents were optimistic about the potential efficiency gains, they were equally vocal about the importance of maintaining high professional standards. For instance, they advocated for policies ensuring that any outputs generated by Gen AI undergo careful review and refinement by human attorneys.

The survey highlighted additional nuances in staff expectations and experiences. Attorneys who had experimented with Gen AI noted that it excelled in producing quick, rough drafts for standard documents, which could then be tailored to specific cases. However, they emphasized that its role should remain supportive rather than primary, with human judgment steering its use. Interestingly, no significant difference was found between how Gen AI was used remotely versus in the office, demonstrating flexibility in its application.

The findings also suggested broader institutional needs. While some attorneys praised Gen AI’s ability to handle routine tasks, others pointed out inefficiencies stemming from a lack of standardized best practices. This gap presents an opportunity for the firm to lead with clear policies and targeted training, ensuring that all staff can benefit equally from the technology.

By conducting these surveys and focus groups, the firm identified critical areas for intervention, including the need for robust training programs, ethical guidelines, and strategies to address staff concerns about role displacement. These insights laid the groundwork for a thoughtful, data-driven Gen AI integration strategy that aligned with both the firm’s operational goals and its commitment to professional excellence. This case demonstrates that listening to employees and addressing their specific concerns and aspirations is a key step in successfully integrating transformative technologies like Gen AI.

Providing Training and Education on Gen AI in Law

Successful integration of Gen AI depends on the technical competence and ethical awareness of a firm’s employees. Training and education are therefore essential. Law firms should design programs tailored to different roles within the organization, ensuring that attorneys, paralegals, and administrative staff are equipped to use Gen AI responsibly and effectively. Training should address three core areas: technical functionality, ethical considerations, and workflow adaptation.

Technical training should familiarize employees with the capabilities and limitations of the specific Gen AI tools being implemented. For example, they should learn how to interpret AI-generated outputs, refine prompts for improved results, and detect errors in the system’s responses. Ethical training should highlight issues such as confidentiality, bias, and the necessity of human oversight. Case studies—such as incidents where lawyers faced sanctions for unverified reliance on Gen AI—can underscore the importance of adhering to professional standards. Finally, training should demonstrate how Gen AI fits into existing workflows, clarifying how it complements traditional legal practices and enhances productivity.

Ongoing education is also critical as Gen AI tools evolve. Firms should invest in regular workshops or online modules to keep employees updated on new features, industry developments, and best practices. This commitment to continuous learning ensures that the workforce remains competent and confident in leveraging Gen AI effectively.

Establishing Clear Policies and Oversight for Gen AI in Law

Developing clear policies around the use of Gen AI is critical to maintaining accountability and minimizing risks. These policies should outline acceptable and unacceptable uses of Gen AI, ensuring consistency across the firm. For instance, guidelines might specify tasks where Gen AI is appropriate, such as drafting documents or conducting initial contract reviews, while reserving certain functions for human oversight.

Firms should also establish protocols requiring employees to verify the accuracy of Gen AI outputs before sharing them with clients or courts. A dedicated oversight team or committee can monitor compliance with these policies, assess the effectiveness of the Gen AI tools, and address any issues that arise. Furthermore, data use protocols should be implemented to ensure that sensitive information is handled securely and in compliance with ethical standards.

By combining thorough assessments, robust security measures, comprehensive training, and clear policies, law firms can integrate Gen AI in a way that maximizes its benefits while mitigating potential risks. These foundational steps pave the way for a responsible and effective adoption of this transformative technology.

The integration of Gen AI raises significant concerns about data security and confidentiality, especially in a profession where client information must be safeguarded. Gen AI tools often require processing large volumes of sensitive data, which can introduce vulnerabilities if not properly managed. To address this, firms must implement robust security measures and thoroughly vet potential Gen AI vendors. Questions to consider during vendor evaluations include whether the system uses encryption to protect data, anonymizes client information, and has strict access controls to prevent unauthorized use.

Firms should also explore options to process data locally rather than relying on cloud-based servers, which may present greater risks. In addition, internal protocols should clearly define how sensitive information is handled within Gen AI systems. For example, lawyers might be required to obtain explicit client consent before inputting case details into Gen AI tools. Regular audits of AI outputs and usage can further ensure that confidentiality is upheld. These proactive measures help maintain trust and compliance with both legal and ethical obligations.

Case Study: Overcoming Gen AI Integration Challenges at a Mid-Sized Law Firm

A mid-sized law firm with just over 150 staff members embarked on its journey to integrate Gen AI, drawn by its potential to streamline processes like document review, legal research, and client communication. Despite initial enthusiasm, the firm encountered significant challenges that threatened the project's success.

The firm’s Gen AI-powered document review system quickly drew criticism from junior associates, legal assistants, and paralegals who found the Gen AI's outputs rife with errors and lacking nuance. Instead of saving time, employees often had to correct mistakes, leading to frustration and skepticism about the technology's value. Additionally, fears of job displacement fueled resistance. Although leadership emphasized Gen AI’s role as an assistant, many, particularly junior associates handling initial legal research, perceived the technology as a threat to their roles.

To address these concerns, the firm brought me in as a consultant to help. I began by doing surveys and focus groups to assess concerns and priorities. Next, I organized workshops that clarified Gen AI's capabilities and limitations. We emphasized that Gen AI would manage repetitive tasks, freeing employees to engage in more complex legal work. Moreover, we underscored the irreplaceable value of human critical thinking, legal interpretation, and client relationships. As a result of these workshops, the firm saw a 30% improvement in employee satisfaction scores related to the use of new technology.

Despite these efforts, the integration faced another hurdle: organizational silos. For instance, the Gen AI system tasked with automating client onboarding required data from multiple departments, but a lack of collaboration led to delays and incomplete outputs. To overcome this, the firm established cross-functional teams to prioritize data sharing and collaboration. This structural adjustment streamlined workflows and enhanced the Gen AI’s performance, ultimately reducing onboarding time for new clients by 40%.

Through education, structural changes, and persistent effort, the firm gradually shifted its culture to embrace Gen AI. Over a 12-month period, the firm reported a 25% reduction in time spent on document review and a 20% increase in overall productivity, at least for the clients who approved the use of Gen AI for their cases. By the end of the integration process, employees recognized Gen AI as not just a tool for efficiency but also a catalyst for innovation and strategic legal work. The journey illuminated that successful Gen AI adoption requires addressing technical issues, managing employee concerns, and fostering a culture of adaptability.

Conclusion

The integration of Gen AI into law firms offers immense potential for transforming operations, from enhancing efficiency to fostering innovation. However, the journey requires thoughtful planning, adherence to ethical guidelines, and proactive management of organizational and employee challenges. By learning from real-world experiences, like the mid-sized law firm that overcame skepticism and structural barriers, firms can unlock Gen AI's full potential while upholding the profession’s high standards.

Witness preparation is a cornerstone of effective legal practice. Competent attorneys recognize the importance of preparing witnesses for both depositions and trials, ensuring they understand the process, anticipate potential lines of questioning, and learn strategies for responding to tough inquiries. This duty stems from our duty to provide competent and diligent representation. (See, e.g., Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct R. 1.3 (2024)).

The American Bar Association (ABA), in its Formal Opinion 508, addressed the ethical considerations surrounding witness preparation. The ABA defined “effective preparatory guidance” as more than simply discussing anticipated testimony; it emphasized the need for comprehensive preparation to ensure accurate, credible, and truthful statements.

This article introduces an innovative model for witness preparation and methods of social sciences that integrates generative artificial intelligence (AI) to optimize witness statements. This method is designed to improve the quality of testimony for all witnesses expected to testify, whether laypersons or experts, while adhering to ethical and legal boundaries.

The Importance of Witness Preparation

Successful attorneys have long recognized the value of thorough witness preparation. This process often involves reviewing anticipated questions and answers, clarifying the witness’s role in the case, and addressing concerns about the courtroom environment. The preparation process is not merely about rehearsing testimony but about empowering witnesses to deliver truthful, accurate, and persuasive statements.

The importance of witness preparation was affirmed at a hearing in United States v. Brindley, 14-cr-0468 (N.D. Ill. 2015), a case that explored the limits of witness prepping. Brindley was accused of improperly coaching his witnesses by scripting potential answers to questions likely to arise at trial. While such practices are often scrutinized for their potential to cross ethical boundaries, the court ultimately found Brindley not guilty in a bench trial. The judge noted that exhaustive preparation is not only permissible but also essential for effective legal advocacy. Any competent trial attorney would never put a witness on the stand without thorough witness preparation, not unlike the ones performed by Mr. Brindley. 

The Brindley case underscores the fine line between permissible preparation and unethical coaching. Attorneys must ensure that their preparation methods are aimed at fostering truthful testimony without leading or influencing witnesses to provide false or misleading information. The case also highlights the effectiveness of traditional question-and-answer preparation methods, which remain widely used to help witnesses recall events accurately and confidently.

Goals of Witness Preparation

The goals of witness preparation are twofold:

1. Educating witnesses about the testimony process: This includes familiarizing them with courtroom procedures, the roles of different participants, and the types of questions they may encounter. Many witnesses, particularly laypersons, are unfamiliar with these aspects of a trial and may feel overwhelmed without proper guidance.
2. Enhancing communication skills: Witness preparation helps individuals convey their testimony clearly and confidently. This often involves addressing behavioral aspects, such as tone of voice, body language, and maintaining composure under pressure. Behavioral interventions, such as mock examinations and role-playing, are common tools to build confidence and reduce anxiety.

Despite its significance, witness preparation is sometimes undervalued or overlooked. Traditional methods, such as written handouts or video instructions, are insufficient for certain witnesses, possibly leading to inaccuracies or miscommunications during testimony. A lack of preparation can cause witnesses to fill memory gaps with guesses or fabrications, leaving their statements vulnerable to cross-examination.

Furthermore, a common misconception is that witnesses can simply “tell the truth” without preparation. While honesty is paramount, many witnesses are unaware of how to present their testimony effectively. Anxiety, fear, or a lack of understanding of courtroom dynamics can lead to nervous or inconsistent behavior, which may be misinterpreted as dishonesty. Proper preparation ensures that witnesses present themselves as truthful, credible, and persuasive, thereby advancing the overarching case theme.

Does Witness Preparation Work?

While attorneys have long relied on witness preparation as a critical component of trial strategy, empirical research on its effectiveness is relatively limited. However, studies in the social sciences support its usefulness:

• Increased credibility: Research indicates that prepared witnesses are perceived as being more credible because they use effective testimony delivery skills.  For example, a study by Boccaccini, Gordon, and Brodsky (2005) found that witness preparation training improved both the accuracy and perceived credibility of witnesses.
• Enhanced confidence: Prepared witnesses tend to project greater confidence, which positively influences juror perceptions. Confidence, as noted by Stiff and Miller (1986), is a key factor in persuading jurors and establishing witness credibility.
• Reduced anxiety: Effective preparation helps witnesses manage anxiety, enabling them to remain composed under cross-examination. Even witnesses with nothing to hide can benefit from these techniques, as nervousness or hesitation may otherwise be misinterpreted.
• Improved trial outcomes: Studies suggest that witness preparation can significantly influence trial outcomes. For example, Boccaccini (2002) noted that well-prepared witnesses are more likely to contribute to favorable verdicts. Similarly, Singer (1996) argued that preparation is essential for achieving trial success.

While traditional preparation methods are of questionable value, the integration of AI in addition to traditional witness preparation offers new opportunities to enhance the preparation process. By leveraging AI tools, attorneys can identify areas for improvement, provide targeted feedback, and optimize witness statements with unprecedented precision.

The Nordstrom Method for AI-Assisted Witness Preparation

The Nordstrom Method represents a modern approach to witness preparation, utilizing voice-to-text technology and AI analysis to refine witness statements. This method is designed to streamline the preparation process while enhancing the accuracy and credibility of testimony. This approach incorporates advanced AI tools that provide detailed insights into witness performance. 

The Nordstrom Method consists of three main stages.

1. Initial Session

The preparation process begins with an initial session where the witness is directed to a distraction-free environment, usually a conference room. In advance of this session, the attorney prepares a series of key questions addressing the fundamental aspects of the case: who, what, why, when, and where. These questions are tailored to the specific facts and circumstances of the case. There, of course, are additional case-specific topics the attorney will want to discuss.

The witness then records their responses using a voice-to-text device, such as an iPhone 16 Pro or a compact recorder like the PLAUD, a standalone wristwatch-sized recording device. The recorded statement should thoroughly address all relevant topics, including:

• Date, time, and environmental conditions: Details such as weather, lighting, and location can provide important context.
• Physical evidence: The witness should describe any photographs, contracts, or other tangible items relevant to the case.
• Conversations and actions taken: Recollection of verbal exchanges or specific actions is critical.
• Ongoing implications: Witnesses should address any ongoing medical, emotional, physical, educational, or financial effects.
• Impact on personal relationships: For example, how the incident affected the witness’s family and social dynamics.

The witness is instructed to provide clear, truthful, and factual statements without exaggeration. This session typically lasts less than an hour but forms the foundation for subsequent analysis and refinement.

2. AI Analysis

The recorded statement is then analyzed using AI tools to identify areas for improvement of the statement. AI algorithms can perform several key functions:

• Keyword analysis: AI generates a word cloud visualizing key concepts and word frequency, helping attorneys identify recurring themes or gaps in the witness’s statement.

• Emotional tone analysis: Sentiment analysis tools can also be used to evaluate the emotional tone of the witness’s responses, providing insights into their attitude and confidence levels. For example, AI may detect hesitation, frustration, or uncertainty in specific answers.
• Content optimization: AI suggests ways to clarify or enhance the witness’s responses, ensuring their testimony is concise and impactful.

This stage provides attorneys with valuable insight to guide future preparation sessions.

3. Follow-Up Session

In the follow-up session, the witness reviews a transcript of their statement, initially without the attorney present. This allows the witness to reflect on their responses while identifying areas for improvement. The attorney then joins the witness to discuss the statement’s strengths and weaknesses as presented by the AI program.

During this session, the attorney provides constructive feedback. Positive feedback is emphasized to build the witness’s confidence before addressing the specific areas for improvement while establishing rapport. This collaborative process ensures that the witness feels supported while making necessary adjustments to their testimony. The witness is then given the AI report to take home for further practice.

Finally, depending on the complexity of the case and the witness’s sophistication, additional sessions may be scheduled as needed. These additional sessions may also help address non-verbal communication, such as attire, posture, and body language, all of which play a significant role in juror perceptions.

Prepping Expert Witnesses

This method can also be adapted for expert witnesses, who often face more rigorous cross-examinations. AI tools can analyze prior testimony, identify potential vulnerabilities, and fact-check statements to ensure their consistency and accuracy.

Additionally, some advanced AI tools can evaluate micro-expressions and other facial cues from video recordings, providing insights into a witness’s emotional reactions and perceived truthfulness. These tools are particularly useful for assessing how expert witnesses may be received by jurors.

Despite the many positive features of AI technology, it is important to note that AI is a tool to assist attorneys, not a replacement for human judgment. Attorneys must carefully integrate AI-generated insights into their broader trial strategy, ensuring the witness statements align with the case theme and all ethical standards.

Witness preparation is an essential component of trial advocacy, beginning with the initial contact with the client and continuing throughout their representation. While the process requires significant time and resources, the benefits far outweigh the costs. Thorough preparation enhances the witness’s credibility, reduces anxiety, and increases the likelihood of favorable case outcomes in both settlements and trials.

The integration of AI into witness preparation represents a significant advancement in the way witnesses are prepared. By leveraging AI tools, attorneys can optimize witness statements, identify areas for improvement, and provide targeted feedback with unprecedented precision. This innovative approach not only enhances the quality of testimony but also improves the chances of settlement and trial success and eliminates the attorney stress knowing that the witness will perform as expected in court. 

Conclusion

Neglecting witness preparation can compromise a case, leaving unprepared witnesses vulnerable to cross-examination and misinterpretation. By embracing new technologies and methodologies, attorneys can ensure their witnesses are well-prepared to provide truthful, credible, and persuasive testimony.