I’ve noted in a number of posts here Lex Machina’s continuing expansion of its legal analytics into new practice areas, particularly since its acquisition by LexisNexis in 2015.

Today Lex Machina is announcing a new module that adds ERISA litigation cases. The module encompasses nearly 83,000 cases filed in federal district court pending since 2009, it says, covering disputes over the administration of employee benefit plans protected by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) of 1974.

As with its other analytics modules, the ERISA litigation module’s analytics are designed to help attorneys prepare case strategies and navigate the complexities of ERISA. According to Lex Machina, the module primarily covers cases initiated by plan participants or beneficiaries involving disputes over administration or funding of protected plans, including life, health, retirement, pension, profit-sharing, healthcare savings accounts, and more.

Lex Machina says that specific cases include employers seeking reimbursement for overpayment, employees seeking ERISA-authorized penalties against employers who may have withdrawn from ERISA plans, and U.S. Department of Labor intervention lawsuits.

Webcast on ERISA Analytics

For anyone interested in learning more about the ERISA analytics module, Lex Machina is offering a free webcast today, Nov. 14, at 1 p.m. Eastern time. You can register for it here.

What does it mean to practice data-driven law? On this episode of LawNext, I speak with Jeff Pfeifer, the LexisNexis vice president charged with driving overall product strategy for LexisNexis Legal and Professional, North America. Over the past several years, Pfeifer has spearheaded a series of acquisitions and product developments, all with the goal of establishing LexisNexis as the leader in legal analytics and enabling what he calls data-driven law.

Pfeifer oversaw the company’s 2016 acquisitions of legal analytics companies Lex Machina and Intelligize and the 2017 acquisition of Ravel Law. Most recently, Pfeifer led the roll-out of Lexis Analytics, a suite of tools that organizes all of LexisNexis’s major analytics acquisitions and products (as well as a couple new products) into three categories of analytics – litigation, regulatory and transactional. I speak with Jeff about these acquisitions, the launch of Lexis Analytics, and his vision of the data-driven lawyer.

Pfeifer is a 29-year veteran of LexisNexis. Before taking on his current role in 2015 as vice president of product management, he was vice president, primary law and Shepard’s, and president and CEO of LexisNexis Puerto Rico. Earlier, he was vice president of marketing. He was recognized this year as among the Fastcase 50, honoring the “smartest, most courageous innovators, techies, visionaries, and leaders in the law.”

Listen above, on Apple Podcasts, or via your favorite podcast player. To never miss an episode, subscribe on Apple Podcasts or via RSS, or like us on Facebook. And if you like what you hear, say something nice in Apple Podcasts. Your ratings help us reach more listeners.

New: Record a voice comment. Want to comment on a LawNext episode and have it played on the show? Record your comment as a voice memo on your device and email it to info@lawnext.com. Each week, we’ll play selected comments on the show.

The legal analytics platform Lex Machina, which is owned by LexisNexis, has been steadily expanding its coverage into new practice areas, and today has added insurance litigation.

The new module provides analytics for more than 92,200 cases pending in federal court since 2009 that involve disputes between an insurer and a policyholder, a beneficiary, or another insurer asserting the rights of a policyholder.

These insurance cases make up the third-largest case set on the Lex Machina platform, the company says, with court-awarded damages totaling nearly $2.8 billion.

The module covers a variety of policy types, including homeowners, automobile, life, commercial liability, professional liability, uninsured/underinsured motorists, health, disability income, and others. It does not cover Medicare, Social Security disability and ERISA claims. It includes only insurance cases (including class actions) that were litigated  in federal district court, and in which parties that reside in different states dispute claims involving more than $75,000.

With its expansion into insurance litigation, Lex Machina now covers 10 practice areas: patent, copyright, trademark, antitrust, securities, employment, commercial, product liability, federal bankruptcy appeals, and insurance litigation.

In the process of creating this module, Lex Machina added 50 insurance-specific case tags and annotations to better enable users to find relevant cases and filter out others. Lawyers can use these analytics to see the track records of opposing counsel and parties, the experience and behaviors of judges, and key factors about cases, such as case timing, findings and damages.

Among the 50 new insurance-related case tags:

  • Forty-two new findings, including: Duty to Defend, Duty to Indemnify, Bad Faith, Insurer Negligence, Policy Exclusion, Failure to Pay Premium, Insured Fraud, Unjust Enrichment, and Estoppel/ Waiver.
  • Seven insurance damage types: Contract Damages, Restitution, Tort Damages, Emotional Distress Damages, Enhanced Damages,Punitive Damages and Approved Class Action Settlement.
  • Two Insurance Remedies: Rescission and Reformation.

With the launch of its insurance module, Lex Machina has already uncovered interesting historical insights into insurance litigation, including:

Webcast on Insurance Analytics

For anyone interested in learning more about the insurance litigation module, Lex Machina is presenting a free webcast Thursday, Aug. 9, at 1 p.m. Eastern time. You can learn more and register here.

When LexisNexis acquired the legal analytics platform Lex Machina in November 2015, the the plan was to integrate Lex Machina’s analytics into various LexisNexis products and, in particular, its Lexis Advance legal research platform. Last January, it took the first step in that direction when it integrated judge analytics into Lexis Advance, and later in the year it added integration for law firm analytics.

Yesterday LexisNexis rolled out the third such integration, attorney analytics. Now, when Lexis Advance users are viewing full-text cases, they can click on the names of the attorneys involved in the case and view summary charts showing data about the attorney, such as the attorney’s case-filing history.

This works for the practice areas currently covered by Lex Machina: patent, copyright, trademark, antitrust, securities, employment, commercial, product liability and federal bankruptcy appeals.

From that summary page, Lexis Advance users who also have a subscription to Lex Machina can drill further into the full Lex Machina set of analytics.

(Note that attorneys’ names have been blotted out from these images.)

As it continues to expand its legal analytics into new practice areas, Lex Machina is today announcing the addition of analytics for federal product liability litigation. The new module is the largest expansion of the platform to date, it says, encompassing nearly 500,000 cases pending since 2009, including 158,000 open cases.

Since launching with its initial focus on intellectual property and its acquisition by LexisNexis, Lex Machina has added modules for securities, antitrust, commercial litigation, employment and bankruptcy.

Like those other modules, the new products liability module uses data derived from court dockets to provide insights and show trends in areas such as case timing, resolutions, findings, and damages for injuries caused by product defects.

Among the case types covered are aircraft, asbestos, medical devices and pharmaceuticals, and vehicles. It also includes subrogation cases, in which a third-party, such as an insurance company, takes over the case on behalf of the plaintiff.

Some 91 percent of federal product liability cases since 2009 are part of a multi-district litigation, LexMachina says. In MDL matters, the module will allow users to filter out the “noise” of associated cases and focus only on the master case, if they choose, or include the associated cases.

Among some of the key insights LexMachina found in the product liability data:

  • More than 10,300 vehicle-related cases have been brought since 2009. Last year saw the largest number of these cases filed (2,226 cases).
  • The three district courts with the most product liability cases since 2009, representing 58 percent of all filings nationwide, are the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (29 percent), Southern District of West Virginia (21 percent), and Eastern District of Louisiana (8 percent).
  • Asbestos-related filings made up over 140,000 cases pending since 2009 – 97 percent of which were filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Products Liability Webcast Tomorrow

Tomorrow, I will moderate an Above the Law webcast that will discuss emerging trends in products liability litigation and provide an introduction to Lex Machina’s products liability analytics. Panelists will be:

  • Eric Falkenberry, partner at DLA Piper and experienced litigator in product liability cases.
  • Owen Byrd, chief evangelist and general counsel at LexMachina.

The program is tomorrow, Nov. 14, at 12:30 p.m. Eastern time.

The new employment module includes analytics showing case resolutions.

When LexisNexis acquired the legal analytics platform Lex Machina in November 2015, the plan was to use LexisNexis’s collection of federal and state docket data to expand Lex Machina’s analytics beyond its original area of intellectual property. Since then, it has been adding practice areas at a regular clip, starting with securities last July, antitrust in November, and commercial litigation last month.

Now comes employment litigation, as Lex Machina today announces an employment litigation module that analyzes data from some 71,000 discrimination, retaliation and harassment cases filed in federal court since 2009. The new module provides the same sorts of analytics as prior modules, offering insights into case timing, resolutions, damages, remedies and findings, as well as information on law firms, parties, judges and venues.

“We decided after the Lexis acquisition that if we wanted to go big we’d have to attack the broad middle of the law,” Owen Byrd, chief evangelist and general counsel at Lex Machina, told me yesterday. “In terms of case count and value to practitioners, we quickly centered on commercial and employment as our first big additions to our offering. Last month, we rolled out commercial. Now rolling out this week is federal employment litigation analytics.”

Analytics show the timing to key events in cases.

The module provides analytics for three types of employment cases, those in which an employee is suing an employer for discrimination, retaliation or harassment. In the fall, Lex Machina will add disabilities and labor relations cases to the module.

Next month, Lex Machina will add a module for bankruptcy cases, Byrd said.

While the underlying analytics are the same, each new module requires the addition of subject-specific tags. Lex Machina says it develops these tags by interviewing practitioners in each area of law to better understand their practice area and use cases. The employment module adds tags related to:

  • Damages. New tags have been added for back pay/lost wages, emotional distress, front pay, liquidated damages, and punitive damages.
  • Findings: New tags have been added for discrimination statues such as Title VII (race/color, religion, national origin, sex/gender), ADEA (age), PDA (pregnancy), §1981/§1983 (equal rights/civil rights violations), USERRA (members of the military), the Equal Pay Act and the Rehabilitation Act. Tags have also been added for hostile work environment/harassment, retaliation, failure to mitigate defense, time barred defense, failure to accommodate, legitimate nondiscriminatory/non-retaliatory reason defense, and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
  • Remedies: New tags related to remedies are notice posting, promotion and reinstatement.
This shows employment findings by judgment event.

Lex Machina says that the new employment analytics will allow attorneys to answer questions such as:

  • How many times have damages for lost wages been awarded in a federal employment case? What were the specific amounts?
  • What can you know about a law firm sending a demand letter – how real is the threat?
  • Which law firms have the most experience defending Walmart in federal employment cases?
  • How often – and in which cases – have judges in the District of Delaware found a hostile work environment?
  • What are the chances of obtaining a summary judgment order in an employment case from a specific judge?

In demonstrating the module yesterday, Byrd pointed out some interesting findings revealed by the analytics. One is that the law firms generally perceived to be the three dominant firms representing employers in employment cases truly are. Data shows that the firms with the most employment cases are Littler Mendelson, Ogletree Deakins, and Jackson Lewis.

The data also shows that plaintiffs rarely win in employment litigation. Although the analytics do not reveal the outcomes of cases that settle, for those that go to trial, plaintiffs win in just 1 percent of cases, and on summary judgment, plaintiffs win in only a negligible fraction of cases compared to employers.

With regard to remedies, the analytics show that punitive damages were awarded in only 192 employment cases and attorneys’ fees in just 437 cases.

Some other trends revealed by the data:

  • Based on cases filed between Jan. 1, 2009, through June 30, 2017, discrimination lawsuits are by far the most common (87 percent of cases), followed by retaliation (66 percent) and harassment (35 percent).
  • Employment cases often involve overlapping kinds of claims. Discrimination and retaliation claims are combined more than half the time, and the other two combinations occur in about a third of cases.
  • Cases with all three tags comprise just under a quarter of the cases.
  • Top government defendants include local entities such as the City of New York and the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority, as well as federal organizations such as the U.S. Post Office and Department of Defense.
  • Corporations facing the most employment cases include Walmart, Home Depot, Target, United Parcel Service, Bank of America, and United Airlines.

If you are interested in learning more about this new module, Lex Machina is hosting a free webcast tomorrow, July 13, at noon Eastern time to demonstrate its analytics and discuss some of the trends in employment litigation the analytics reveal. The webcast will be moderated by David Lat, founder and managing editor of Above The Law, and will include David Walton, shareholder at Cozen O’Conner; Patrick DiDomenico, chief knowledge officer at Ogletree, Deakins; and Byrd.

The legal analytics company Lex Machina today announced what it is describing as the most ambitious and largest expansion yet of its analytics into a new practice area, commercial litigation.

Since its acquisition in November 2015 by LexisNexis, Lex Machina has been using LexisNexis’s collection of federal and state docket data to expand its analytics platform beyond its original area of intellectual property into other practice areas, adding securities last July and antitrust in November. It plans eventually to cover every federal practice area.

With today’s release, Lex Machina is adding data on 62,000 commercial cases dating back to 2009. Attorneys will be able to use its analytics to obtain insights on case timing, resolutions, findings, damages, , remedies, and also to obtain competitive and strategic intelligence on opposing counsel, law firms, parties, judges, venues, and more.

Lex Machina says that, to meet the needs of commercial litigators, today’s release adds new practice area-specific tags and features, including:

  • Expanded case timing analytics. In addition to the time-related analytics it already had — such as time to dismissal, trial and termination — this new release adds time to permanent injunction and summary judgment.
  • New damages categories. Commercial cases include contract damages, restitution, and other damages, as well as tort compensatory damages and punitive damages.
  • New breach of contract and business tort findings. New tags have been added for contract breach, existence, rescission, and termination, as well as contract defense and unjust enrichment. Business tort findings include conversion, defamation/trade libel, fraud/misrepresentation, misappropriation of trade secrets, negligence, tortious interference, and tort defense.

In announcing today’s news, Lex Machina CEO Josh Becker said the addition of commercial litigation was the company’s most ambitious addition yet because the category transcends so many types of legal practice. Of over 62,000 commercial cases filed since 2009, 80 percent include a breach of contract claim and 57 percent include a business tort claim. Roughly 25 percent of commercial cases meet the definition of an intellectual property, securities or antitrust case, and are coded in PACER as such.

At noon Eastern today, Lex Machina is presenting a webcast about its new commercial litigation analytics: “New Legal Analytics for Commercial Litigation.”

A new Silicon Valley legal technology accelerator launched by LexisNexis today named five startups selected to be its first participants.

As I wrote here in December, LexisNexis launched the accelerator to help give legal tech startups a leg up. It is based in the Menlo Park offices of Lex Machina.

The five participants were chosen from a list of more than 40 startups based on the interesting natures of their businesses and their innovative uses of technology, LexisNexis said. They are:

  • Visabot. An “immigration robot” powered by artificial intelligence that helps customers complete U.S. visa applications, including locating relevant open data about an applicant, guiding applicants in the process of gathering supporting documents, ensuring forms are filled out accurately, and drafting appropriate language to tell the applicant’s story.
  • TagDox. A legal document analysis tool that creates tags, allowing users to identify and structure information in a variety of document types, improving both the speed and the quality of the document review process; “tag results” can transform documents into easily readable summaries, checklists, database feeds or approval overviews.
  • Separate.us. A web-based application that automates legal document preparation for divorces and provides access to relevant professionals at affordable fixed rates, deploying a business model that targets both B2B and B2C customers.
  • Ping. An automated timekeeping application that collects all of a lawyer’s billable hours, capturing missed time and money, and operating entirely in the background in concert with standard legal billing software.
  • JuriLytics. An expert witness peer review service that attorneys can use to challenge their opponent’s experts with previously unobtainable credibility and bullet-proof their own expert’s work through vetting from the world’s top researchers (in any field of expertise).

The 12-week program is intended to help participants gain knowledge and expertise in a variety of topics, including technology and product development, running an agile product development organization, building a strong company culture, selling to legal departments and law firms, leveraging legal data, and best practices in customer success, marketing and fundraising.

In addition, they will have access to the full store of legal data available through LexisNexis and the ability to leverage relationships with Stanford University and other leading Bay Area schools, businesses, VCs and influencers.