In the rapidly evolving legal landscape that seems to be remodeled every minute by AI, technology continues to reshape the practice of litigation. The ABA 2024 Legal Technology Survey Report on Litigation Technology & E-Discovery offers a guarded look at current adoption rates and usage patterns across firms of all sizes. This year's findings reveal partially compelling developments in courtroom technology, e-filing systems, and e-discovery practices.
The 2024 Survey captures input from a diversely-sized cross-section of legal professionals: 19% solo practitioners, 32% small firms (2-9 attorneys), 24% mid-sized firms (10-49 attorneys), and 25% larger firms (50+ attorneys). Also notable is the demographic composition of respondents, with an average of 28 years in practice and nearly half (49%) having been admitted to the bar for more than three decades. This longevity brings an interesting perspective to technology adoption.
The percentage of attorneys who practice in courtrooms has stabilized at 66% in 2024, unchanged from 2022 but still lower than the 72% reported in 2018. This trend likely reflects the lingering effects of pandemic-era remote proceedings.
There is a steady increase in technology use within courtrooms. Laptop usage has jumped to 74% of court practitioners, compared to just 50% in 2018. Attorneys are increasingly using laptops to access evidence (54%), check email (51%), conduct legal research (46%), and retrieve court documents (46%).
Smartphone adoption has reached an impressive 87%, up from 81% in 2022, primarily for email (82%), real-time communications (59%), and calendaring (56%). Tablet usage (e.g. iPads) remains modest at 25% suggesting these devices have found a niche use rather than universal application in courtroom settings.
Firm size appears to correlate strongly with the use of technology in the courtroom. Attorneys from larger firms (100+ members) report the highest laptop usage rates in the courtroom at 85%, while smaller firms are catching up rapidly. This narrowing gap could indicate that courtroom technology is becoming more accessible and essential regardless of firm resources.
Despite the increased technology adoption, only 41% of respondents report having received formal courtroom technology training – a marginal improvement from 39% in 2022. The most common training approaches include practicing with technology before “live” use (73%), utilizing court-provided training materials (59%), and attending court-sponsored sessions (52%).
This training gap reveals a significant opportunity for improvement. When respondents who reported practicing in a courtroom were asked for reasons for the lack of training, 34% cited the lack of availability, 30% simply felt it wasn’t necessary, and 21% stated they only practiced infrequently in court. These numbers suggest a need for more accessible, and more targeted training programs that can provide clear value to practitioners.
Half of all respondents now report having “litigation support software” available at their firms, marking a modest increase from 47% in 2022. The availability spectrum ranges predictably with firm size, from 27% of solo practices to 73% of large firms.
However, a striking disconnect emerges between availability and actual usage. Despite increased access to these tools, only 31% of respondents personally use litigation support software – up from 26% in 2022 but still remarkably low considering its potential benefits.
The top litigation support software products include Relativity (40%), CaseMap (13%), Concordance (12%), and Summation Pro (11%). For trial presentation, PowerPoint maintains its dominant position (75%), followed by specialized tools like TrialDirector (35%) and TrialPad (20%). The leading features of litigation support software that respondents found most useful include full-text search (38%), document review (36%), bates stamping (30%), redaction (25%), OCR (24%), and trial presentation features (15%).
A major component of litigation support software revolves around electronic discovery, and the percentage of attorneys who report processing and/or reviewing electronically stored information (ESI) increases as firm size increases: 35% of solo respondents, 55% from firms of 2-9 attorneys, 63% from firms of 10-49 attorneys, and 66% from firms of 100 or more attorneys.
The Survey also reflects some additional interest and utilization of analytics and AI assistance in reviewing and producing ESI although “keyword searching” retains its dominance at 85%, up from 81% in 2022. Next we see “natural language search” at 65%, “concept searching” at 37%, “AI-assisted search” at 28%, and predictive coding at 22%.
Despite these incremental advances, substantial barriers to adoption seem to persist. A remarkable 76% of respondents cite unfamiliarity as the primary reason for not using predictive coding, followed by case size concerns (18%) and cost issues (11%). This knowledge gap represents perhaps the most significant obstacle to wider adoption of advanced e-discovery tools.
The transformation toward digital court filings continues unabated, with 86% of respondents now filing documents with state or local courts (up from 84% in 2022). More significantly, electronic filing has become mandatory in 54% of state courts and 47% of local courts, with almost no respondents (just 0.3%) reporting unavailability of e-filing options in their state courts.
Document upload methods have diversified, with attorneys reporting:
This digital transformation is most evident in the types of documents now routinely filed electronically: motions (91%), pleadings (90%), appearances (85%), and notices (83%). The days of paper-only court filings are clearly behind us.
The 2024 ABA Survey reveals a legal profession in technological transition. While adoption rates for basic technologies like laptops and smartphones in court settings are impressive, more sophisticated tools for litigation support and e-discovery face persistent adoption barriers.
The challenge moving forward appears to be less about technology availability and more about addressing the knowledge gap. With many respondents citing unfamiliarity as their primary reason for not using advanced tools, focused training programs and simplified interfaces could significantly accelerate adoption.
The digital transformation of legal practice is no longer a future trend—it's today's reality. The question for legal professionals is not whether to adopt these technologies, but how quickly and effectively they can integrate them into their practice.
