Law Firms NAICS 541110

Jan 16, 2026 - Federal Rule Governing AI-Generated Trial Evidence Draws Skepticism

• A proposed federal rule to govern the use of AI-generated evidence in US trials drew skepticism from corporate and class-action lawyers, who said the effort may be premature. The draft, considered by the Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, would require AI-generated evidence offered without an expert witness to meet the same reliability standards applied to human experts. Supporters say it would close a gap in existing rules, which already scrutinize expert testimony but do not explicitly address non-expert use of AI. Critics countered that courts are already managing the issue effectively and that litigators rarely introduce machine-generated evidence without an expert to vouch for it. Others raised concerns about ambiguities in the proposal and noted that AI’s impact on the justice system is still evolving, making it unclear whether a nationwide rule is needed now.
• Florida has joined Texas in curbing the American Bar Association’s role as the sole gatekeeper for law school accreditation, a move that could reshape law firms’ recruiting pipelines. The Florida Supreme Court ruled that while graduates of ABA-accredited schools remain eligible for the state bar, the court will open eligibility to graduates of law schools approved by other federally recognized accreditors. Supporters say the change could expand access to more affordable legal education and diversify the talent pool available to firms. Critics warn it may create uneven standards and complicate firms’ evaluation of candidates’ training and readiness. Texas has adopted a similar approach, and Ohio and Tennessee are reviewing theirs, signaling a broader shift that law firms may need to monitor closely as accreditation standards (and perceptions of credential quality) begin to vary by state.

• US law firms are increasingly exploring management services organizations (MSOs) to attract outside capital while complying with ethics rules that bar non-lawyers from owning law firms. MSOs let investors own entities that handle back-office functions - such as technology and operations - without sharing in legal profits, opening a route for private equity and litigation funders to invest in legal services. Firms including McDermott, Will & Emery and Cohen & Gresser are in talks about potential MSO deals, and investors like Burford Capital are engaging on MSO planning. This trend responds to rising capital needs due to technology costs and lawyer compensation, and follows regulatory changes in some states that loosen ownership restrictions. While the American Bar Association has not formally approved MSOs, recent state ethics opinions suggest potential permissibility. Industry observers predict MSO arrangements and other investment models could expand through 2026, reshaping legal market dynamics.
• US law firms are moving away from remote work policies that became common during the pandemic, according to industry recruiters. The shift highlights the industry’s effort to balance employee satisfaction with maintaining productivity and competitiveness in a tight labor market. More firms are asking lawyers to come into the office three to four days a week, seeing in-person work as key to collaboration, mentoring younger associates, and maintaining a firm culture. While many firm leaders say this approach helps productivity and keeps teams connected, not all lawyers are happy with the change. Some are pushing back or are even considering leaving for firms that still offer more flexibility. Despite this, the overall trend is clear: remote work is fading as the standard practice in the legal industry. A small number of firms continue to use flexibility for recruiting, but for the most part, law firms are emphasizing face-to-face interaction.