CorporateLegal.tech
The CorporateLegal.tech AI editorial team writes practical, vendor-neutral guidance for General Counsel and legal operations leaders: what is changing in legal technology, what it means for in-house teams, and how to choose and adopt the tools that actually help.
About CorporateLegal.tech
CorporateLegal.tech is a neutral directory and resource for in-house legal departments. Our editorial team uses AI and tracks what is happening in legal technology, from AI adoption and regulation to pricing and procurement, and turns it into practical guidance for General Counsel and legal operations leaders.
We publish four kinds of content: Articles on running a modern legal department, Problems and Solutions that connect common headaches to the technology built to fix them, Templates you can put to work right away, and Watercooler takes on the lighter side of legal tech.
Our goal is simple: help legal teams make confident, well-informed technology decisions without the vendor noise.
CorporateLegal.tech
March was benchmark season, and the benchmarks said the same thing: generative AI had gone mainstream in corporate legal, but budgets, headcount and executive respect hadn't caught up. Meanwhile the two biggest legal AI startups raised three-quarters of a billion dollars, and Legalweek turned into a fight over who owns the lawyer's desktop. Here's the recap.
February was the month Wall Street panicked about legal AI, and the month two federal courts reached opposite conclusions about AI and privilege on the same day. It was also the month in-house teams put numbers on a suspicion: their law firms are using AI and keeping the savings. Here's the recap, with eight months of hindsight.
January set the tone for the whole year. New state AI laws switched on, the federal government announced it would fight them, and a judge reminded everyone that AI chats are discoverable records. Meanwhile, investors poured money into tools built specifically for in-house legal teams. Here's the month that started it all, with nine months of hindsight.
The arbitration clause was supposed to be the safe choice: one claimant at a time, no class action. This week Chariot Claims raised a $10 million Series A to file mass arbitrations at scale, and says it already handles more than 200,000 pre-qualified claims a month. Here are seven hard truths for in-house teams, plus what to actually do about it.
Legora and Harvey launched agentic intake tools for in-house teams on back-to-back days. Before any bot answers the business on legal's behalf, it needs rules. This template gives you a routing matrix, a playbook readiness checklist, escalation and privilege rules, copy-and-paste disclosure language, and a 30/60/90 scorecard with a go/no-go decision.