Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming how law firms deliver legal work — but most firms haven’t applied the same innovation to how they get paid.
Billing and collections are the engine of a law firm’s financial health, yet at many firms, this core process remains fragmented, opaque, and manual. In a profession built on trust, precision and performance, the invoice-to-cash cycle is lagging far behind — and the cost of inaction is growing.
At many firms, the billing, collections, payment and reconciliation cycles are riddled with inefficiencies. Invoices are sent with little visibility into delivery or engagement. Clients follow up weeks later claiming they never received them. Compliance with outside counsel guidelines is handled ad hoc, often relying on billing teams who manually apply “invisible rules” known only to a handful of experienced individuals. Collections, meanwhile, are managed through spreadsheets, disconnected emails, and inconsistent follow-ups.
This disjointed approach isn’t just frustratin— it’s expensive. Revenue leakage, unnecessary write-offs, extended invoice outstanding days (DSO), and poor forecasting all result from a lack of integration and insight across this critical workflow. It slows down the business, burdens attorneys and staff, and erodes the firm’s ability to operate with confidence while providing a mediocre client experience at best.
Client expectations around financial interactions have shifted. Corporate legal departments are adopting centralized legal operations models, demanding more transparency, greater control, and increased accountability. They want secure portals, easy access to invoices and statements, real-time status updates, and payment options that mirror their consumer experiences.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.