Fresh Voices on Legal Tech with Chantal McNaught

Episode Notes

Transcript

Announcer:

Web 2.0 innovation collaboration, metadata got the world turning as fast as it can hear how technology can help legally speaking with two of the top legal technology experts, authors and lawyers, Dennis Kennedy and Tom Mighell. Welcome to the Kennedy Mighell report here on the Legal Talk Network

Dennis Kennedy:

And welcome to episode 410 of the Kennedy Mighell Report. I’m Dennis Kennedy in Ann Arbor,

Tom Mighell:

and I’m Tom Mighell in Dallas.

Dennis Kennedy:

In our last episode, we replayed our well-received episode on connecting AI with our second brain projects, the perfect experiment for kicking off 2026. If you haven’t listened to that one yet, we highly recommend it. In this episode, we have another very special guest in our Fresh Voices on Legal Tech series in Fresh Voices. We want to showcase different and compelling perspectives on legal tech and much more. Tom, what’s all on our agenda for this episode?

Tom Mighell:

Well, Dennis, in this edition of the Kennedy Mighell report, we are thrilled to continue our fresh voices on legal tech interview series with Chantal McNaught, host of the People in Legal podcast and co-founder of 43 Below. Chantal brings a unique perspective from New Zealand and the tensions between laws of profession and laws of business, and we are excited to explore her insights on the people side of legal technology. We want our Fresh Voices series to not only introduce you to terrific leaders in the legal tech space, but also provides you with their perspective on the things you should be paying attention to. And as usual, we’ll finish up with our parting shots, that one tip website or observation that you can use the second that this podcast is over. But first up, we are so pleased to welcome Chantal McNaught to our Fresh Voices series. Chantal, welcome to the Kennedy Mighell Report.

Chantal McNaught:

Oh, thank you so much. It’s absolute pleasure to speak with you.

Tom Mighell:

Before we get started, can you tell audience a little bit about yourself, your work with people in legal 43 below and what our audience should know about you?

Chantal McNaught:

Sure thing. So I’m an Australian lawyer by training and found myself here in ROA New Zealand through my seven and a half years working in legal technology at Leap Legal Software. But prior to that I did practice in law as well and have a incredible passion for people technology. And strangely enough, I do get a lot of strange looking faces when I say I really do love working with lawyers. And I hope that this passion comes across as well as I am one of the hosts for the People and legal podcasts. And the show that I deliver there is the Law and Beyond show because the way that I see it with how legal technology and all of the services that are forming within the bigger justice market are what serve lawyers and justice and I call it the expanding legal universe. Think of it like the Marvel universe. I have also recently just launched and co-founded 43 Below, which is, well 43 degrees below. It is a line of latitude just south of Hobart because in the world famous ocean race, the Sydney to Hobart that if you find yourself 43 below, you’ve missed Hobart, you’ve gone too far south and you are lost. And the idea of 43 Below is that we help legal professionals with their charts so to speak, so that they don’t end up 43 below.

Dennis Kennedy:

Well Chantal, first of all, it’s so awesome for us to have you as a guest on the podcast. Your LinkedIn tagline is fascinating to me. You say answering the question how lawyers can navigate the conflicts between law as a profession and law as a business. And you talked about how navigation kind of comes into play there that really resonates with us. Isn’t that always easy I find to talk with lawyers about this tension, let alone about technology? I like the way you’re able to talk about these topics and build community around them through people in legal. Would you talk about your approach to communicating with lawyers and others in the legal profession and about technology and what you found works well for you?

Chantal McNaught:

Oh, thanks so much Dennis. Flattery will just get you everywhere and I’m surprised that that legal tech head wasn’t the one that draw your attention. But yes, answering the question on the tension between law as a profession and law as a business is actually my PhD thesis topic and it is a culmination of my practice experience and my experience in legal tech having met tens of thousands of lawyers across both Australia and New Zealand. Absolutely agree with you. It is a touchy subject because lawyers are experts in the law, they’re not experts in business. And there is a historical record of this tension, these conflicts between professionalism and the commercial realities of legal practice. And I’m just going to get nerdy for a second and reference a jurist and a scholar from over a hundred years ago, and that was Julius Henry Cohen back in 1916 wrote in his treaties law professional business.

He said, and I hope this resonates with some of your listeners as well. He said, we are the officers of the court and the slaves to trade. And so when it comes to the communication piece as well, I really love that question because I don’t think I’ve ever been asked that before. And it is really challenging to develop a vocabulary about talking about tech with lawyers. And that really only came from experience when I was in practice. I had a very traditional boss who insisted on printing everything on a file. We had really spiky, literally called file spikes. I don’t know if you have them everywhere in the world, but on the Gold Coast in Queensland 12 years ago we did and I literally would bleed on my files. And the frustrating part though was it wasn’t that long ago and the government departments, they would have portals.

So we were lodging visa applications. And so I would have to do what I could only describe as digital origami and have to scan these documents and try and work out how to get them into the file sizes that the government portals would accept. I got fed up because I’m not a quitter. And so I spent many weeks, late nights putting together a whole bunch of solutions to present to my boss. And you know what he said to me? He said, Chantal, I pay you to run your files, not tell me how to run my business. And so you know what? I’m so grateful for that experience. It was shocking to hear as a young lawyer, but it did help me realize what my passion was and that is in relation to that intersection between technology communication and lawyers. And without that experience, I don’t think I would’ve have found my spot, so to speak in legal technology and then embark on this massive thesis project.

Tom Mighell:

It feels like that boss didn’t have a good sense of technology competence, which is kind of my next question. I think that if he’d had more technology competence, he would’ve been more sympathetic to what you were trying to do. We love to ask our guests about technology competence because we talk about it a lot here. I don’t believe that there’s not an explicit requirement in either New Zealand or Australia for technology competence there, but I know that it gets discussed. I know that it’s being recommended. What do you see with the lawyers there in terms of their technology competence and then maybe what do you think a lawyer needs to know to be technologically competent in today’s legal market?

Chantal McNaught:

I am familiar with the a b rules and that technological competence, and you’re absolutely right in the Australian jurisdictions and in New Zealand, there isn’t a specific one. There is in the model rules. And instead how the profession has defined their core obligations under the relevant conduct or client care rules has been to expand the general competency rule.

And so that competency rule, and I’m going to refer to my notes here because I think we’re all lawyers in the room, that competency is taught and reasoned to be about lawyers knowing about which tools are appropriate at which situations to meet the fundamental duties to the court, the client, the administration of justice and to the profession. Now, I don’t necessarily agree that my old boss had a limited technology competence. He knew what he knew, but that I think is the part of the question, right, is how do you expand on what you don’t know? And that is part of this tension that I see come up in a lot of the literature and the conversations occurring around professionalism and commercial reality because the technology is rapidly changing and it requires a level of curiosity that is not something that’s inculcated in how lawyers are expected to operate. An expert can’t be curious about what they don’t know or could they be. And so I want to throw down a challenge for the listeners who hopefully are listening because they are curious about technology and they want to improve their competency, but it has to come from that. My boss’s reaction to me wasn’t because he wasn’t competent. I think it was because he felt like I was targeting him, I was attacking him and that’s not fair. So yeah, I hope that articulates my position on that.

Tom Mighell:

Well, I will just say that my analogy was a little tortured way of getting to the next question, which obviously wasn’t as strong as I wanted it to be. Although I will say that as a litigator, as a litigator for 18 years to be a good litigator, you have to become an expert in whatever the subject matter of that litigation is. So you have to have a little curiosity. But I agree that there is a lack of curiosity when it comes to things like technology. A lot of lawyers expect it to work or expect to have things, tools that will get work, but there’s not. I agree with that, but I think that there is some curiosity out there maybe just not for this.

Chantal McNaught:

I love that Tom. And exactly right there is curiosity and there’s creativity. The amount of lawyers that I know that play musical instruments that are comedians. So it’s not that the skills don’t exist, it’s that they haven’t been applied.

Tom Mighell:

We’ll have to talk about the show our lawyer group puts on every year after we’re done here. I’ll tell you more about that.

Dennis Kennedy:

So what you guys are talking about, it reminds me of what happened this week when a student came up to me after a class and said that she wanted to know how you chose which technologies to learn and how she should think about that. And I said, we’re going to talk about that throughout the class, but a lot of it is this curiosity and lawyers, the best lawyers I know have this sense of lifelong learning. And I said, you’re going to find some things that you like, but you can’t learn everything. And she’s like, that’s the thing. How do I get started? I go, there’s some basics like cybersecurity or some other things, but kind of go with where your enthusiasm is. And I sometimes feel like I could be a teacher at my daughter’s Montessori school, which is kind of go where your interests are, how you learn things. But I think that as in the class I’m doing, we’re talking about what do the law firm associates of 2026 need? And so my question to you is what are the areas you see in the legal profession that need the most attention these days and how do we get people to pay that attention without a whole bunch of exaggeration and fearmongering?

Chantal McNaught:

Yeah, I’m going to be super provocative around this because I know you like to talk about tech, but I’m going to say that this is about ethics and I don’t mean about model rules and that following what you’re told or what you think that you should be doing. I mean ethics from the perspective of philosophy because through my research I came to this realization that ethics is the philosophy of decision-making rather than when you’re talking about deciding on what you’re going to learn next and working that out, really that is about a decision and informing yourself on what decisions are going to be better than others, especially in these periods of uncertainty and volatility that is going to be really helpful for any kind of technology. Technology is like taxes, right? It’s just something that will constantly change. It’s a constant here and I’m seeing it more and more, especially within the May I label the Microsoft Suite, it seems like every second day they change where the buttons are.

So I was having that conversation with a law firm earlier this week when I was running an AI workshop and we’re talking about how they can help their staff use co-pilot within their systems more. And it came about pretty obviously, that they couldn’t just circulate an email and highlight, here’s where you see the button because the button keeps moving. So really it is about going back to those fundamentals and I think that’s something that can help you with everything in your life is going, how can I make the right decision? How do I know it’s the right decision? And there’s lots of philosophies out there. I’m not prescribing a specific one, but I think it is absolutely relevant to that technology question, Dennis.

Tom Mighell:

Dennis and I love to talk about collaboration. We talk about it all the time and we always like to understand from our guests what are some of the ways that they like to collaborate. I’m going to keep the focus off technology because I usually like to ask what kind of tools are people using? I always want to know about the latest tools so I can try them out, but instead I’m going to really talk about what are from a people perspective or from a process perspective, what are some of the ways that are your favorite ways to collaborate, whether it’s with your coworkers, with the people you podcast with, what works for you?

Chantal McNaught:

I have to laugh because I am totally going to be, and now that I know you’re a litigator, totally just going to go the opposite because you’re going to talk about

Tom Mighell:

Technology, aren’t you?

Chantal McNaught:

I’m going to talk about technology, but I will get to that. I see where we’re second part. I see here, I see where this context

Tom Mighell:

Is going, you

Chantal McNaught:

Know who you’re dealing with that, but actually, you know what? I’m going to flip it. I’m going to answer that community question and then get to the technology and the community question is, I think this is a really great example. We are building community and collaborating right now. We’re negotiating this whole purpose of bringing about some interesting things to think about and discuss, and that is a form of collaboration. One of the things that I do is I’ve got these old timey basically like calling cards and I write on them. Instead of business cards, I just write a little cute message with whoever that I’m meeting up with or I might meet at a conference. It has my name on the back, it has fully automated luxury lawyering, which is the prior previous name of my newsletter, which is now fully innovative luxury lawyering. And now with the internet, you can just Google my name and maybe remember fully lawyering and you might be able to find me, track me down. So that I think is not getting bogged down in the formal ways of collaboration and just letting yourself be a little bit more childlike. How do kids run around on the playground and work together and have fun? Bring a little bit more of that in your everyday conversations and to the technology point, because I did actually have something that spring to mind, may we take a moment of silence to Mourn Law, Twitter, LinkedIn is the next best place for sure, but RRP,

Tom Mighell:

I’ve gone through all my mourning and I’m done. So

Chantal McNaught:

Absolutely, yes, blue Skies tries, but it’s not the

Tom Mighell:

Same. No, it’s not. Threads is not the same either. Neither of them

Chantal McNaught:

Work.

Tom Mighell:

No, nope, you’re right. Alright, we have more questions to ask Chantal McNaught, but we first need to take a break for a quick word from our sponsors

Dennis Kennedy:

And we are back with Chantal McNaught of people in legal and co-founder of 43 Below. We founded the Fresh Voice of series that we love to hear about our guest career paths and I’m already fascinated by just the hints I’ve heard from Chantal and our audience does as well. You have a great career story and I think there’s a lot of great marketing in what you’ve done because you have that legal tech, redhead, Jim, podcasting, community building. Would you talk about PhD, working for a crabby lawyer, all these great things. So when you talk about your career path and what kinds of things you’ve done to get you to where you are now,

Chantal McNaught:

Thank you. That means so much because when I was fresh out of law school, you have this sort of dream of what it should look like in the same sort of sense as like you go to law school and you think you have learned the law and then you realize that instead of arguing about the constitution, you’re arguing with a printer. So that has been the reality of the experience and over the years coming to appreciate not just acknowledge but appreciate and practice the gratitude that the non-linear pathways are the ones that are the most fun with my own careers. As you said, I’ve got a fun story to share that was just a little, it was six months of my entire working life, so not that long, but man, I was just out of legal practice working in a marketing team for a law firm and the whole point of their marketing project was search engine optimization.

As people were searching their legal problems, the goal was to come up on the search results for those long tail results, for those very specific legal questions that had the correct information. It was so well known that even other lawyers were using the website as a basis of research, which was pretty fun and it was so successful. The team we had managed to contribute $2 million to the firm’s revenue and as part of a bit of a celebration, the big boss who owned the firm took us all out for our lunch. He practiced in the eighties, so you can imagine what kind of lunch it was. And while we were quite inebriated and joyful, he then announced that because he had been so successful making lots of money as a law firm owner, he was finally able to follow his lifelong dream of opening a jazz bar.

And as the marketing team, we were going to be the ones to help him. So I can say that that sobered me up a little bit and I had to think about it overnight because at least he gave us that grace and I thought, wow, who else at 26 could be given that sort of opportunity? And so for six months after that, I had all kinds of things that I got to do. I had arguments about what constitutes jazz because the jazz bar in Brisbane is called Dobo, which is named after the posthumously released album of Mighells Davis. So you can imagine that the owner loves his bebop, but I was trying to let him know about all the history from New Orleans and the rag time then gives rise to big band and swing because we don’t have video on here, but you can tell from my LinkedIn profile that I’m more of a mid-century type person and I do love some west coast, which is a type of dance.

And I was trying to convince him that I think it’d be a good idea to just allow for a big enough stage for a big band, and he didn’t really like that idea. So that was really an interesting time. We actually built our own ticketing system because he didn’t want to pay ticket tech, which is fair enough. And after six months it got so crazy. I thought, you know what? Again, reminded I love the lawyers and I was no longer connected to the law firm working on legal stuff. It was all music, all jazz all the time. So that was a big fun part of my career that all I can say is what’s the lesson? Maybe do say yes to something that’s crazy because if it doesn’t work out, you can always pivot again.

Tom Mighell:

Okay, Shantelle, I want to talk a little bit about your podcast and the guests that you have on the podcast. And I’m curious, you talked kind of a little bit about your career path, but you’re also talking to others about theirs and what I’m interested to know, what are some of the themes that you’re seeing? What do you see? Are there career paths that are repeating that are surprising you? Are there things that you never even thought we would be thinking about that you’re seeing? What strikes you when you’re talking to all these people about how they’re diverging from the traditional law path?

Chantal McNaught:

Thanks, Tom. Yes, the people in Legal is what it says on the tin. It’s about all the people in legal and the law and beyond Show is absolutely about exploring those alternate career paths in law and that expanding universe. One of the highlights, it was actually the first episode that I did, and it was crazy because I actually hadn’t met Tom prior. I have just consumed his hilarious content on LinkedIn, but Tom Pills styles himself as the drone lawyer and is an expert in drone law in Australia. And that was a really eyeopening conversation because not only did his career path of starting out, not as a lawyer, but in the big four in an accounting type area. Now I don’t want to give too many spoilers, you can go find that episode, but his career pivots were very much defined by an accumulation of experience that when you go through life and take on experience and continuous learning, which is what we talked about before, that is where you end up finding these golden gems, golden gems when you find these magical gems that can define entirely new roles and entirely new subject matter expertise.

And to really get that sort of perspective from him and how Tom had reviewed what his values are. Then that has been reflected in a lot of the people that I have subsequently interviewed as well because the reality is the most interesting and happiest people don’t work other people’s dream jobs.

Tom Mighell:

That is,

Dennis Kennedy:

I love that. So I think it’s time to talk about AI a little bit. So I have two perspectives on legal tech that come into play here. So one is I’ve always felt that Australia was way more leading edge in technology in the east of law than the US is. So that’s my perspective on it. The other is, I was just on a regular Zoom meeting I do where we had someone talking about using AI to create digital twins and video audio text, and that’s something that I’ve been doing a lot of work in myself in my personal AI research. I made a comment in the chat saying, as people were talking about, good luck finding lawyer who understands this enough to help you. These are people in very large well-known organizations who are on this call. So a couple things about ai. So I’m just really interested in what people think is happening in AI in law that are actually really interesting and that they’re doing for themselves. I always ask my students, what did you try in AI or what have you tried in ai? And so for you, what do you see out there either for yourself or for others that’s actually working in AI these days? And where there are action and actual outcomes, not just talk and maybe it’s easy to say what actually gets you excited, if anything about AI these days?

Chantal McNaught:

Yeah, I have heard the same sort of sentiments as well about seeing Australia and New Zealand as being more technologically ahead or interested in the us but I think having then dug a little bit deeper, meeting quite a few lawyers. I suspect though that it’s just similar. There’s just a population difference because the reality in Australia and New Zealand is that the future is here, it’s just not evenly distributed. I think that was by a sci-fi author

Dennis Kennedy:

William Gibson. Tom gets tired of me referring to that all the time.

Chantal McNaught:

Oh, I’m so sorry, Tom. But I had to invoke, it’s been a

Tom Mighell:

While. It’s

Chantal McNaught:

Been a while.

Tom Mighell:

So it was time. It was time.

Chantal McNaught:

And to get to your point about what the practicalities are, not just talk, I’m going to be super provocative. Not that I haven’t been provocative this whole interview, so thank you for being such great sports, but I’m going to suggest that generative AI isn’t a technology and hear me out, here’s my argument. It’s more closely akin to a sociological mirror that enables completely different workflows. It’s a unique general purpose tool in the same sort of transformational energy as electricity, and it has the potential to completely change what legal practice looks like, but also what justice could look like if we choose. So that’s actually a big part of why 43 below and with my co-founder Winnie, we are focusing on AI fluency education. And rather than taking, you can do this with this tool and this prompt, we’ll get you there, it’s more about invoking those aspects of ethics as a decision-making philosophy to start asking those questions.

Like with your digital twins thing of is that a job for ai? If I tell the AI to make a decision in this particular way in the form of let’s just say a project instructional prompt for some sub prompting, then the bigger question is, well, for that task or that area of task, is that going to be appropriate use of the ai? What sort of human impacts is that going to have and invoking those lawyer skills that we all love, which is the discernment? What could go wrong? What is something that we haven’t actually thought about that is going to be an unintentional consequence of that? And I think those might sound like academic airy fairy soft things, but when you start to think about just that simple task of, oh, I really want to use notebook LM for this thing, and then pausing, holding a moment is that whole line, that chain of what it’s going to be for not just the notebook LM part, but what’s the ultimate objective or goal that you’re wanting to output And then being curious and discerning, yes, that’s something for ai.

You’ll find, because I’ve been practicing this for ages ever since I’ve discovered this four D AI fluency framework by Richard Daikin and Joseph Feller, that it is so useful for everything, not just legal tasks, but you can start to use it for taking a photo of your fridge contents and asking it, Hey, can you do a meal plan? And then you start going, hang on a minute, what’s the construction of a meal plan? I know what foods I like and what I like to avoid, but the AI doesn’t. So maybe I can break that down and go, actually, here are my favorite recipes. I have this, this, and this. Is there anything in substitution that I can make with what I have or do I really have to go to the shops or order that off Amazon?

Tom Mighell:

That’s so good. I love that. Alright, we’ve got more questions. We still have more questions, but we need to take another break to hear from our sponsors. We’ll be right back. And now let’s get back to the Kennedy Mighell report. I’m Dennis Kennedy. And I’m Tom Mighell, and we are joined by our special guest, Chantal McNaught of people in legal and 43 degrees below. We have time for just a few more questions.

Dennis Kennedy:

So I teach law students these days and they’re struggling as they look at the profession they’re about to go into and what they see out there, and I did a survey of these students and front and center for them is will AI replace their jobs? So how would you encourage today’s law students based on all the people we’ve talked to and new lawyers to find career paths in non-traditional careers in law? And what advice would you like to give to those of just starting out in the legal profession?

Chantal McNaught:

Yeah, I can totally empathize with those concerns because I was told as I was graduating that there are no jobs because of the financial crisis and I had to live through 200 rejections. So I do appreciate the concern there and particularly in that broader narrative that is being projected. But as history and experience has told us older folk and more experienced folk in at least this area of law is that they’re temporary states of change. And all you can do because there’s stuff that’s out of your control, and I’m going to invoke the stoics here, but to just focus on what is within your control. I think you’ve put it really well earlier on in this call about following what sparks and is something that is of interest because the ultimate thing is not you are wanting a job, but you’re wanting to live a life. And if you see it from that kind of point of view, it helps put it into perspective and it becomes less of an anxiety thing and more of a, okay, this is the reality. How am I going to get through this? And that’ll make you a better lawyer.

Tom Mighell:

Alright. We always end our podcast with our most selfish question, which is we love to mine our guests for the people that they think would be fresh voices. And I always like to ask this question for people who are outside of the United States because we need to hear from more voices from other places. And so who are the voices right now that you’d like to single out that you think we should give a listen to and maybe join on the podcast?

Chantal McNaught:

There are so many. So if I had to pick just one, it’s a rising star when it comes to the legal ops voice and that’s Ann Ru Stevens. She’s also based here in New Zealand and is featured at the Law Fest Conference, which is New Zealand’s largest law and technology conference that’s happening in March, 2026. Ann Ru is also a community builder just on that whole theme of your show here. And she’s actively involved in Tom Walker’s legal ops monthly meetup, which is full of New Zealand based professionals who support each other through technological transformation projects for law firms and legal teams.

Tom Mighell:

Awesome. Yay. New name. I love it. Alright, well, we want to thank Chantal McNaught of people in Legal and 43 below for being a guest on the podcast. Chantal, tell us where people can learn more about you, more about people in Legal 43 Below law and below Law and beyond, and connect with you.

Chantal McNaught:

Yes. The easiest way is to find me on LinkedIn. I’m c McNaught or just Chantal McNaught.

Dennis Kennedy:

I will agree with that because that’s how I found Chantal. So thank you so much, Chantal. You were fantastic guests, great information and advice for our listeners and as usual as we get into this, so many topics to discuss and so little time. But now it’s time for parting shots, that one tip, website or observation, you can start using the second this podcast ends. Chantal, take it away.

Chantal McNaught:

Thanks Dennis. And yes, connect with me on LinkedIn. Send me a message and I’ll send you an AI worksheet to help you use AI in your legal work fluently by actively managing the risks and other issues like hallucination and ethics.

Tom Mighell:

Alright, my parting shot, and frankly everybody, Dennis and Chantal may already know this and y’all may know this, but I don’t care. It’s new to me. It’s my parting shot for me, which is I’ve always been a little concerned about the limitations of Notebook lm, by which I mean you only can add so many resources to a specific notebook. And if not that I’ve exhausted this very much for my notebooks, but I don’t like being limited to that and maybe I want to have two notebooks that can talk to each other, or I want to do more with it. What I just learned in the past week is that when you’re working in Gemini, you have an option now to connect Gemini to multiple notebook LM notebooks. So you can query Gemini and say, look at these resources in these notebooks, and you can run your search or your query or whatever, your prompt, whatever off of that. And I haven’t been able to dig into it, but I just saw the fact that it was there. I’m very excited. I’m plan to try that out. And that’s kind of made me a little bit more excited about continuing to use Notebook. Lm Dennis,

Dennis Kennedy:

You got to love Notebook lm. I mean, it’s just really working for me. And so I think it’s great, Tom, of course, I want you to explore some of this before I jump in, but as usual, because using it some different ways now. So I’m excited to announce that my personal Strategy Compass Newsletter is now available as a free subscription through substack. I’ve been sharing insights on AI strategy and creative thinking, and now everyone can access it without barriers because I’m really turning more toward an open source approach to my writing. So you can subscribe on substack and it’s where I explore personal strategic planning and my approach I call the personal quarterly offsite.

Tom Mighell:

And so that wraps it up for this edition of the Kennedy Mighell

Dennis Kennedy:

Report. Thanks to the Legal Talk Network team for producing the show. You can find show notes and transcripts on the Legal Talk Network website.

Tom Mighell:

If you like what you hear, please subscribe and leave us a review. You can subscribe in your favorite podcast app or on the Legal Talk Network site.

Dennis Kennedy:

You can also connect with us on LinkedIn with your questions or to share your thoughts about the episode. So until the next podcast, I’m Tom Mighell. And I’m Dennis Kennedy and you’ve been listening to the Kennedy Bio Report, a podcast on legal technology with an internet focus since 2006.

Announcer:

Thanks for listening to the Kennedy Mighell report. Check out Dennis and Tom’s book, A Lawyer’s Guide to Collaboration Tools and Technologies, smart Ways to Work Together from A Books or Amazon. And join us every other week for another edition of the Kennedy Mighell Report, only on the Legal Talk Network.

Continue Reading