1. Home
2. Columns
3. ABA Day 2025: Your voice, your advocacy,…

Report from Governmental Affairs

April 9, 2025, 6:00 am CDT

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. KPMG’s bid to deliver legal services delayed…

Law Firms

KPMG’s bid to deliver legal services delayed as top Arizona court seeks more information

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 29, 2025, 3:21 pm CST

The Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday pushed back a decision on whether to allow a new subsidiary of accounting company KPMG to practice law in the state.

KPMG Law US is seeking to operate through Arizona’s alternative business structure program, which allows nonlawyers to own or invest in law firms. The state supreme court has requested “additional information or clarification on aspects of the application” before reaching a decision, a court spokesperson told Bloomberg Law and Law.com.

The Arizona Supreme Court’s Committee on Alternative Business Structures had unanimously recommended approval of KPMG’s application earlier this month. The committee acted after a KPMG representative answered questions, including a query about how the firm would provide legal services in other states without violating ethics rules.

The new firm plans to work with staffing agencies and local lawyers to serve clients in other jurisdictions, KPMG compliance lawyer David Rizzo told the committee.

KPMG, which has more than 3,750 employees, already has legal practices in more than 80 jurisdictions.

Law360 recently spoke with Christian Athanasoulas, a U.S. tax partner and head of tax services at KPMG, about the accounting company’s plans.

KPMG Law US plans to hire Arizona-licensed lawyers who will deliver legal services in the state. The new firm does not intend to offer legal services to audit clients but will seek opportunities with clients served by its tax and advisory businesses.

“We’ve recognized that there is a need for services related to legal that are very much adjacent to the services we deliver today,” Athanasoulas said. “That’s not a full portfolio of legal services but rather a handful of pinpointed legal services that address client pain points and are adjacent to our existing portfolio and service offerings.”

Athanasoulas noted that Arizona wants to bring innovation to the legal profession. KPMG has already “invested incredible resources in technology, including AI,” and that investment could help KPMG Law US deliver “a better work product in a faster, more efficient way,” he said.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Many predictions have been made about the impact of artificial intelligence on the legal profession. From the demise of the billable hour to robots replacing lawyers, projections have run the gamut. Among the most optimistic is the suggestion that rapid advancements in AI could significantly improve access to justice by providing underserved communities with easily accessible and much-needed legal information.

As much as I would like this to be true, the cynic in me remains skeptical that altruism will ever truly trump capitalism. However, the growing momentum behind the recent wave of tools designed to close the access-to-justice gap might just prove me wrong.

How can AI improve access to justice?

There are several ways that AI software can potentially expand access to justice. First, AI tools designed to increase the efficiency of law firm workflows can enable lawyers to take on more cases and provide affordable and effective representation for their clients. This category of tools has been discussed in many of my prior columns and includes AI functionality integrated into software platforms that include document management, law practice management, legal billing, legal research, contract analysis, brief writing and more.

AI software can also be designed specifically for legal professionals who often represent underserved communities, such as those employed by legal aid organizations or attorneys who often handle assigned matters in criminal or family court. By streamlining their workflows and reducing redundant processes, AI technology can enable them to represent more clients.

Finally, AI-powered chatbots that provide legal information directly to the consumer are another way to reduce access-to-justice barriers. Navigating our complex court systems can be challenging even for experienced litigators, so user-friendly interfaces on court websites that simplify judicial processes and procedures can make all the difference.

Issues to consider when choosing AI software

I’ll discuss below the second and third categories and provide notable examples of initiatives and tools that rely on AI to expand access to justice—whether by enabling lawyers to better represent underserved populations or making legal information more accessible and understandable for unrepresented litigants.

Before we dive in, important factors to keep in mind when choosing AI tools for your legal organization include understanding that you’ll be entrusting confidential information to a third party because AI software is typically cloud-based. This means that you have an ethical obligation to thoroughly vet the technology provider by obtaining information on how the data will be handled by that company; where the servers on which the data will be stored are located; who will have access to it; and how often and when it will be backed up, among other things.

Because the software includes AI features, you’ll also want to explore issues that include accuracy rates, how the company protects your data, and whether your team’s data inputs are used to train AI models to improve responses.

Tools for public interest organizations

One way to ensure access to justice is to equip legal professionals who devote their careers to underserved populations with tools that will make their work easier and more effective. AI software companies have approached this aspirational goal in two very different ways.

First, a number of companies have developed AI-powered tools designed to meet the needs and budgets of legal services providers who represent underserved populations. The products address a variety of pain points, with each tool helping to reduce the challenges encountered by legal professionals juggling high caseloads. Notable examples include:

• LawDroid Copilot: A generative AI assistant with pricing starting at $19 per user per month; it can conduct legal research, draft and summarize documents and correspondence, and analyze motions.
• JusticeText: A software platform designed to help public defenders and criminal defense attorneys analyze and transcribe video and audio evidence.
• Descrybe.ai: A free generative AI search engine available in English and Spanish with a database of caselaw from more than 3 million state and federal judicial opinions.

Simultaneously, initiatives such as Thomson Reuters’ AI for Justice Legal Aid program and Everlaw for Good are helping bridge the access-to-justice gap by providing legal aid organizations and nonprofits with cost-effective access to advanced AI tools.

Programs such as these offer subsidized or free access to software that can significantly enhance efficiency. By equipping legal professionals with tools to streamline tasks such as research, drafting and evidence review, these initiatives enable nonprofits and pro bono programs to expand their representation of underserved populations while reducing costs and maximizing impact.

AI-powered tools for legal consumers

Another way to tackle access-to-justice challenges is to provide legal consumers with tools that provide legal information and possibly even assist them in solving their legal issues without needing to retain an attorney. Certain legal matters are simple enough that people may be able to effectively represent their interests in court if assisted by AI tools designed for their needs.

For example, the tools below were developed to aid underserved communities by providing user-friendly platforms that leverage AI technology to simplify complex legal processes. These platforms provide clear and accessible information, enabling people to take actionable steps in resolving their issues. By reducing barriers to understanding and navigating the legal system, these innovations help bridge the access-to-justice gap for those who might otherwise struggle to afford or access traditional legal services. Examples include:

• Beagle+: A contract analysis tool that uses AI to simplify the review and interpretation of complex legal agreements.
• Hello Divorce: A platform designed to streamline the divorce process, offering self-help tools, legal education and optional access to attorneys.
• JustFix: A tenant-focused app that helps renters document housing issues and take action against landlords violating their rights.

Generative AI chatbots are also emerging as powerful tools that help courts and legal aid organizations bridge the access-to-justice gap. These tools use conversational AI to provide self-represented litigants with easy access to legal information, procedural guidance and court resources tailored to their needs.

By automating routine interactions and simplifying complex legal processes, these chatbots reduce court staff’s administrative burdens while empowering people to navigate the legal system more effectively.

Here are some examples of generative AI-powered chatbots currently in use by courts and public interest organizations:

• Legal Information Assistant: A generative AI chatbot offered by Legal Aid of North Carolina that provides answers to legal questions in English and Spanish.
• Nevada Supreme Court’s AI chatbot: This generative AI tool offers legal guidance in multiple languages, helping people understand their legal options and procedural steps.
• Missouri Tenant Help: This online screening tool helps Missouri tenants determine eligibility for legal assistance before connecting with program staff.
• SANDI (Self-Help Assistant Navigator for Digital Interactions): A chatbot on the 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida’s website that provides AI-powered assistance to people navigating the legal system.
• Rentervention: An AI virtual assistant launched by the Law Center for Better Housing, the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation and the Lawyers Trust Fund of Illinois that helps tenants in Illinois access information and resources on housing rights.
• Roxanne: An AI-powered tool designed to assist tenants in addressing housing repair issues effectively in New York.

AI technology holds tremendous potential to reduce the access-to-justice gap by empowering legal professionals and the public with innovative tools and resources. The software discussed above reflects a growing commitment to developing AI for social good despite challenges that include data security, ethical considerations and lack of profitability.

Whether these tools will fully live up to expectations remains to be seen even as current initiatives offer a promising glimpse of what might be possible. Only the passage of time will tell whether AI will ultimately deliver on its potential to make justice more accessible for those who truly need it.

However, as AI-powered solutions continue to evolve, their potential to bridge the access-to-justice gap grows stronger—offering hope that technology can play a meaningful role in delivering legal support to those who need it most.

---

Nicole Black is a Rochester, New York-based attorney, author and journalist, and she is the principal legal insight strategist at MyCase, a company that offers legal practice management software for small firms. She is the nationally recognized author of Cloud Computing for Lawyers and is co-author of Social Media for Lawyers: The Next Frontier, both published by the American Bar Association. She writes regular columns for ABAJournal.com and Above the Law, has authored hundreds of articles for other publications, and regularly speaks at conferences regarding the intersection of law and emerging technologies. Follow her on X (formerly Twitter) @nikiblack, or she can be reached at [email protected].

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. KPMG asks Arizona to OK alternative business…

Practice Management

KPMG asks Arizona to OK alternative business license for subsidiary law firm

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 9, 2025, 8:51 am CST

A subsidiary of accounting company KPMG US is applying to operate as an alternative business structure in Arizona under state ethics rules that permit nonlawyers to own or invest in law firms.

If approved by the Arizona Supreme Court, KPMG Law US would complement the services of traditional firms, a spokesperson told Law.com, Bloomberg Law and Reuters.

Legal teams “face substantial and wide-ranging process challenges that can benefit from legal expertise and technology at scale,” KPMG said in a statement emailed to Law.com. “We aim to solve those pain points, especially on tight timelines.”

The aim is to “bring legal capabilities to managed services, such as contract lifecycle management,” the spokesperson told Bloomberg Law.

Approval would be “a game changer,” according to Law.com.

KPMG Law already offers legal services globally in more than 80 jurisdictions and has more than 3,750 employees. But bans on nonlawyer ownership of firms in most states have prevented companies such as KPMG from offering legal advice with its law-related services in the United States.

The Arizona Supreme Court’s Committee on Alternative Business Structures will consider the proposal Jan. 14. The state supreme court has the final say on approval.

Arizona has already approved more than 100 alternative business structures, but they “have largely been granted to firms practicing personal injury, mass torts and products liability law, as well as trusts, estates and probate law,” according to Law.com.

See also:

KPMG aims to employ 3,000 lawyers within the next few years

Pilot project allowing nonlawyer legal providers gets OK in Washington

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Tune in to our favorite podcasts of 2024

Year in Review

Tune in to our favorite podcasts of 2024

By Lee Rawles

December 23, 2024, 9:57 am CST

The ABA Journal staff have conversations with fascinating lawyers every day. But in our podcasts, you get to listen in on some of those discussions.

In partnership with Legal Talk Network, we produce the monthly Legal Rebels Podcast, hosted by Victor Li, a Journal assistant managing editor, and the semimonthly The Modern Law Library, hosted by Lee Rawles, a Journal assistant managing editor. Here are our favorite episodes from 2024.

Legal Rebels Podcast

What does the future hold for licensed paraprofessionals?: Much has been made of the gigantic access-to-justice gap in this country. According to a 2022 study by the Legal Services Corp., 92% of Americans do not receive any or enough help for a civil legal need. There are many reasons for this.

Tests into and out of law schools—what’s changing and why: Not much can strike more terror into the hearts of aspiring lawyers than the LSAT and the bar exam. Right now, these tests are having a moment.

Will generative artificial intelligence (finally) spell the end of the billable hour?: With the advent of generative artificial intelligence tools that can perform tasks in minutes but might take lawyers or legal professionals hours, could we finally see the end of the billable hour?

The future of DEI programs in the legal industry: The lack of diversity when it comes to race, gender, sexuality, disability and social class within the legal profession is nothing new. However, the last decade has marked a gradual increase in diversity across all fields.

The Modern Law Library

Horse-loving lawyer left the law to help run a Colorado ranch: Ami Cullen grew up loving horses and competing in hunter/jumper events. But when it came to her career, she decided that law would be her calling. She graduated from law school and began work with a law firm in Maryland working on medical-malpractice cases. Then a visit to a Colorado dude ranch changed everything.

‘The Originalism Trap’ author wants to see originalism dead, dead, dead: Originalism is the ascendant legal theory espoused by conservative legal thinkers, including the majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices. But far from being an objective framework for constitutional interpretation, says author and attorney Madiba K. Dennie, its true purpose is to achieve conservative political aims regardless of the historical record.

‘Watchdogs’ author has no regrets about choosing civil service over the NBA: Glenn Fine’s career-long crusade against corruption might have its roots in his college days. As a point guard for the Harvard basketball team, Fine had his personal best game Dec. 16, 1978, the same day that he interviewed for—and received—a Rhodes Scholarship. He put up 19 points against Boston College, including eight steals, and the team nearly eeked out a win against the favored Boston players. A remarkable day.

James Patterson dishes on his new legal thriller, ‘The #1 Lawyer’: James Patterson has written bestsellers in many genres. But as he tells the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles in this episode of The Modern Law Library podcast, he has always been fascinated by legal thrillers, courtroom dramas and crime novels. He even considered becoming a lawyer—before his literary career took off.

‘The Lawyer Millionaire’ author shares the 7 biggest money mistakes lawyers can make: Finances are a fraught area for many attorneys. Despite a high earning potential, new lawyers often start out with a financial disadvantage because of the opportunity cost of the years devoted to school and bar prep, coupled with high student loans.

How to strike up conversations that build your book of business: Networking is something that comes naturally to some people. But if the idea of talking to strangers makes you break out into a cold sweat, there’s help and hope, says Deb Feder, author of the book After Hello: How to Build a Book of Business, One Conversation at a Time.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Pilot project allowing nonlawyer legal providers…

Access to Justice

Pilot project allowing nonlawyer legal providers gets OK in Washington

By Debra Cassens Weiss

December 9, 2024, 11:13 am CST

The Washington Supreme Court has authorized a pilot project that will allow nonlawyer entities to provide legal and law-related services in Washington.

The pilot project will help determine whether regulated nonlegal entities will increase access to justice while protecting the public or whether their operation will create risks of consumer harm, the state supreme court said in its Dec. 5 order.

Reuters and Law360 have coverage; a Dec. 6 press release is here.

The Washington State Bar Association and the Washington Supreme Court’s Practice of Law Board will oversee the pilot program.

Applicants wanting to participate will have to identify a lawyer “or other suitable person” to act as a compliance officer who will ensure that ethics rules are followed and that data is reported to the Washington State Bar Association, the order says. The Washington State Bar Association is required to develop complaint procedures.

“The pilot test is the beginning of a process, not the end; the goal is to learn more and make transparent, data-driven decisions before any permanent regulatory reform is put in place,” according to a webpage on the program.

Indiana is also considering “legal regulatory innovation” that includes legal services providers with nonlawyer owners.

In an Oct. 3 order, the Indiana Supreme Court directed an innovation committee to develop guidelines for such a program that would be approved by the state supreme court, Reuters previously reported.

Utah and Arizona have already implemented similar programs.

See also:

Nonlawyer entities could provide legal services in Washington in proposed pilot program

Irene walked into the office of a young lawyer in a small town in Mississippi more than 40 years ago with an eviction notice and a two-page lease. Events that would follow turned the lawyer into a legal aid attorney and a believer in the power of pro bono legal work.

Irene was devastated at the prospect of losing her home in a rundown trailer park on the edge of town. She had fallen behind on rent. She had always caught up in the past, but this time, the landlord was not listening. Her eviction was imminent.

When Irene walked into the courthouse later that day, the landlord was stunned to see that she had a lawyer. The attorney showed the court that the owner had failed to give proper notice to evict Irene, and he vowed to sue for damages over the horrible condition of the rental property and trailer park. The landlord settled with Irene and with three neighbors who came to the court when they learned that Irene had legal representation.

Irene’s case showed the attorney, who went on to become a bestselling author of legal thrillers and an advocate for legal aid, the power of practicing law to help people. When you show up to represent someone who cannot pay, everything changes. They get respect and a fair hearing.

A veteran struggling with emotional scars after a terrorist attack on his unit in Beirut showed another attorney the power of providing legal assistance. The veteran’s mental health spiraled downward after he found himself near the Sept. 11, 2001, attack in New York. Legal aid helped the veteran get previously denied benefits, so that he could remain in his home, get a job and put his life back together. That case left a lasting impression on the attorney who went on to become the current and longest-serving board chair of Legal Services Corp.

These are our stories as we mark the National Celebration of Pro Bono in October and the 50th anniversary of the LSC—which supports 130 legal aid organizations providing legal representation for low-income people in every corner of the United States. Many lawyers have such stories about their pro bono service—volunteer efforts that expand the ability of civil legal aid to help low-income income people get a fair shake in court.

This added resource for civil legal aid is badly needed. A 2022 access-to-justice gap report from the LSC found that low-income Americans received no or insufficient legal help for 92% of their civil legal problems in 2022.

Evictions, like Irene’s case, and other housing issues dominate legal aid caseloads today, making up 39.5% of the cases closed by the LSC grantees in 2023.

Legal aid also helps low-income people find protection from domestic violence, get fair treatment around consumer and financial issues, and get access to public benefits, including benefits for veterans.

Attorneys have a responsibility to share their skills, knowledge and time to ensure that the justice system works for everyone, including people like Irene, her neighbors and the veteran. Legal aid organizations rely on attorneys to offer their pro bono services to help close the justice gap.

While we have a lot to celebrate in the 50 years of the LSC’s history, we have a long way to go in the struggle to ensure justice for all Americans.

---

John Levi is Senior Counsel at Sidley Austin LLP and board chairman for the Legal Services Corp. John Grisham, an attorney and a bestselling author, serves on the LSC’s Leaders Council.

---

ABAJournal.com is accepting queries for original, thoughtful, nonpromotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors to run in the Your Voice section. Details and submission guidelines are posted at “Your Submissions, Your Voice.”

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. ‘Robot lawyer’ website DoNotPay settles FTC…

Technology

‘Robot lawyer’ website DoNotPay settles FTC claims it couldn’t deliver on promises

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 30, 2024, 10:28 am CDT

A website that billed itself as the “world’s first robot lawyer” has agreed to pay $193,000 to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that it did not live up to its claims.

The DoNotPay website agreed to settle the FTC allegations without admitting or denying them, according to a proposed consent order.

Besides paying $193,000, DoNotPay agreed to refrain from making claims about its ability to substitute for legal services without evidence to support them, the FTC said in a Sept. 25 press release. The company also agreed to provide a notice to consumers who subscribed to the service from 2021 to 2023 about the limitations of its law-related features.

The DoNotPay legal chatbot was founded in 2015 to help people fight traffic tickets, but it later expanded to help people with other legal matters. The company claimed that it could sue for assault without a lawyer, could “generate perfectly valid legal documents,” and could replace the legal industry with artificial intelligence, according to the FTC.

“DoNotPay, however, could not deliver on these promises,” the FTC said in its press release.

According to the FTC complaint, the company didn’t conduct testing to see whether its AI chatbot was producing content that equaled that of a human lawyer. Nor did the company hire or retain lawyers, the complaint said.

The FTC complaint included a quote on the DoNotPay website said to be from the Los Angeles Times: “What this robot lawyer can do is astonishingly similar—if not more—to what human lawyers do.”

The quote actually came from a high school student’s opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times’ High School Insider website, which was a user-generated content platform, according to the FTC.

DoNotPay technologies recognized statistical relationships between words, used chatbot software to converse with users, and used an interface to connect with ChatGPT, according to the FTC.

None of its technologies was trained on a comprehensive database of federal and state laws, regulations and judicial decisions, or on application of the information to fact patterns, the FTC said.

The cost of a consumer subscription varied, but it was $36 every two months at times relevant to the complaint. The company also offered a “Small Business Protection Plan” for $49.99 per month at times relevant to the complaint.

In a concurring Sept. 25 statement, Lina M. Khan, the FTC chair, and Melissa Holyoak, the FTC commissioner, said the settlement “does not suggest that consumers should use expensive professional services, or that companies should avoid offering innovative products that reduce the need for high-priced lawyers. The misdeeds of a few bad apples shouldn’t dampen pro-consumer innovation.”

DoNotPay’s founder, Joshua Browder, is a 2017 ABA Journal Legal Rebel.

Publications that covered the settlement include Above the Law, Law360 and Ars Technica.

A DoNotPay spokesperson told Ars Technica that the company “is pleased to have worked constructively with the FTC to settle this case and fully resolve these issues, without admitting liability.”

“The complaint relates to the usage of a few hundred customers some years ago (out of millions of people), with services that have long been discontinued,” the spokesperson said.

DoNotPay agreed in June to settle a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California claiming that the company “is not actually a robot, a lawyer, nor a law firm.” The plaintiff had said he used DoNotPay to write several legal documents, but he couldn’t use some of them because they were “poorly or inaccurately drafted.”

See also:

Inside the claims against DoNotPay’s Joshua Browder and the ‘World’s First Robot Lawyer’

Judge tosses UPL suit against ‘robot lawyer’ DoNotPay, saying law firm plaintiff was not harmed

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Nonlawyer entities could provide legal services…

Access to Justice

Nonlawyer entities could provide legal services in Washington in proposed pilot program

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 11, 2024, 2:36 pm CDT

Nonlawyer-owned entities would be allowed to deliver legal services in Washington under a pilot program proposed by the Washington State Bar Association and a board created by the Washington Supreme Court.

If the Washington Supreme Court gives its approval, nonlawyer entities with innovative business models could apply to offer legal services temporarily under an exemption to rules banning the unlicensed practice of law, according to a summary on the Washington State Bar Association’s website.

Law360 has a story on the program.

“Our data tells us that our current business models aren’t meeting the needs of all of the people in our community,” Terra Nevitt, executive director of the Washington State Bar Association, told Law360. “That tells me we need to innovate the models, and if our regulations are getting in the way, I think it’s worth testing them.”

The participating entities would have to follow ethical rules and provide information about their delivery of legal services to the public. At the end of the pilot test, the Washington Supreme Court could assess the results and decide whether to make regulatory reform more permanent.

The Washington State Bar Association and the Washington Supreme Court’s Practice of Law Board would oversee the pilot program.

“The proposed pilot test is the beginning of a process, not the end,” according to the State Bar of Washington’s website. “The goal is to learn more and make transparent, data-driven decisions before any permanent regulatory reform is put in place.”

The proposal follows adoption of programs to allow nonlawyer-owned legal businesses in Utah and Arizona.

The Utah Supreme Court approved a pilot program in August 2020 that allows temporary nonlawyer ownership or investment in law firms by entities operating in a “regulatory sandbox.” That same month and year, the Arizona Supreme Court eliminated an ethics rule barring nonlawyers from having an economic interest in firms and preventing lawyers from sharing fees with nonlawyers.

Law360 listed some of the programs implemented in Utah and Arizona. They include “one-stop-shops” that hire lawyers and other professionals, such as professional advisers.

Hello Divorce, an online platform, uses attorneys to help explain divorce steps. ZAF Legal, a legal tech company, has launched a chatbot that helps people who have been injured in accidents determine whether they have a case. Rasa Legal, an app that helps eligible people with criminal records and the expungement process, has software that helps those who want to know whether their criminal records can be expunged.

Nevitt told Law360 that Washington benefits from not being the first state to allow nonlawyer-owned legal entities.

“We’re just so grateful that they’ve laid the groundwork, so that we can learn from their experiences, and that’s what we’ve tried to do,” Nevitt said.

See also:

When it comes to deregulation of the legal industry, divisions run deep

Following decades of discourse on nonlawyer legal services, questions of motives continue

Washington Supreme Court sunsets limited license program for nonlawyers

How the Washington Supreme Court’s LLLT program met its demise