This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Both programs were approved May 7 by the Utah Supreme Court’s Office of Legal Innovation , which oversees the sandbox and reviews and approves applicants. The Utah Supreme Court approved the sandbox last August, setting it up as a two-year pilot program to license and oversee new forms of legal providers and services.
Businesses may wish to start applying the requirements to products and processes ahead of the Act becoming fully enforceable on 11 December 2027. Data Protection Authority powers: The European Court of Justice (CJEU) has ruled that Data Protection Authorities are not obliged to exercise corrective powers in the event of a breach.
Established in 2020 and set to run until 2027, this unique program allows new legal service models to be tested and evaluated. Overseen by the Office of Legal Services Innovation , a division of the Utah Supreme Court, the sandbox represents a significant shift in exploring legal business models and services.
Maryland, Missouri, and Oregon will administer the NextGen Bar Exam in July 2026; Arizona, Iowa, and Wyoming will administer it in July 2027; and Connecticut will administer the exam at a date to be determined. Seven states have already communicated their intentions to use the NextGen Bar Exam.
Law firms quickly adapted to remain connected to clients, courts, and peers through remote work. billion in revenue globally, and the market is expected to expand by over 4% annually through 2027. The attraction of continuing to work from home in a post-pandemic era is tough to ignore.
At the outset, the Utah Supreme Court recognized the importance of data collection and program evaluation, and has tasked IAALS to serve as an independent third-party evaluator for the sandbox. This regulatory sandbox model was built largely on the model IAALS developed and published in 2019. The Utah sandbox just turned three.
Yeah, a lot of courts there are a lot of there’s just a lot of adoption that’s required for something like that. Now, you’ll remind me we you know, when we’re legal tech 2027 You’re gonna come back and go, Greg Lambert 21:12 Joey, you said… Marlene Gebauer 21:14 What happened?
Yeah, a lot of courts there are a lot of there’s just a lot of adoption that’s required for something like that. Now, you’ll remind me we you know, when we’re legal tech 2027 You’re gonna come back and go, Greg Lambert 21:12 Joey, you said. The other the other bit is let’s face it, we as legal was lawyers, we move pretty slowly.
The event, which I recapped in more detail for another publication, presented an interesting set of questions and opportunity for future development of the conversation around an economy that Goldman Sachs predicts to reach $480 billion by 2027.
Candidate, 2027 In Anderson v. TikTok , decided in in late summer 2024, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that TikTok’s “For You Page” algorithm was sufficiently creative to bar its protection under §230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). To justify their reasoning, the Court cited Moody v. By Barbara Rasin, J.D.
On the day before the law’s effectiveness, the district court enjoins parts of the law but says that other parts may be constitutional. The court subsequently enjoined all upheld provisions until February 1 to see if the Ninth Circuit will extend the injunction pending its review. The court says that’s not so.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content