Generative AI has already earned a place in legal work. Lawyers use it to ask questions across large document populations, summarize depositions, compare language, prepare work product, and surface patterns that would take people considerably longer to find. The more difficult question starts when the system stops answering and starts acting.

There is a real difference between an AI system that recommends five custodians and one that issues their holds, initiates preservation, launches collections, processes the results, and stages documents for review. That changes the standard for evaluating legal AI. Model quality matters, but the lawyer who ultimately owns the process also needs to know what the system did, what evidence it relied on, what it was authorized to do, and where a person intervened.

Download this whitepaper to learn:

• Challenges posed by the introduction of AI technologies in eDiscovery
• The differences between generative and agentic AI eDiscovery workflows
• Six principles to govern AI workflows for eDiscovery

‍