What Legalweek 2026 Revealed About AI, Litigation Training, and the Future Lawyer

At Legalweek 2026, the conversation around AI in law felt noticeably different. Not long ago, the focus was on legal tech experimentation – pilots, proofs of concept, and cautious exploration. This year, the tone shifted. The question is no longer whether firms should adopt AI, but how they can use it to improve legal outcomes, strengthen litigation strategy, and better prepare attorneys for high-stakes work.

That evolution was front and center during Verbit’s panel session “Developing the Future Lawyer: Understanding How AI Is Reshaping Litigation Training, Preparation, and Evidentiary Insight,” which brought together leaders from legal innovation, practicing attorneys, and legal technology. The discussion spanned everything from legal training gaps to real-time AI in depositions – and revealed areas where legal tech is delivering real value today.

1. 1. The biggest challenge isn’t AI – it’s adoption.

AI tools are more capable than ever, yet adoption remains uneven across law firms. Our panel shared that “simply introducing new legal tech tools doesn’t work – lawyers won’t adopt what isn’t embedded into their workflow.”

• “Throwing tools over the fence” is ineffective. Implementation requires training, context, and ongoing support.
• The most successful tools integrate directly into the litigation lifecycle, showing attorneys when and how to use them.
• The shift isn’t from “old way vs. new way.” Instead, it’s about enhancing existing legal workflows with technology that fits naturally into practice.

2. 2. Legal training hasn’t kept pace with modern litigation.

Our panel explored a growing gap between traditional training and real-world legal demands.

Common challenges they highlighted include:

• Overreliance on templates without critical analysis
• Weak synthesis and issue-spotting skills
• Gaps in communication and real-time thinking
• Confidence mismatches among associates

Much of these issues stem from passive learning, including lectures, videos, and observation, rather than active participation. One panelist noted, “Training often hasn’t kept pace with the realities lawyers face in litigation today.”

3. 3. Skill development requires repetition – not observation.

One of the strongest themes the panel shared was that lawyers need repetition, not just exposure. They need repeated practice in realistic scenarios, as well as immediate, structured feedback and iteration over time to be successful.

The panel offered an opportunity to showcase how tools like DepoSim, recently launched by AltaClaro and powered by Verbit, enable continuous, simulation-based learning that mirrors real litigation environments. As an immersive AI deposition simulation, DepoSim offers a great example of how “the repetition builds intuition,” the panel noted, “and helps associates handle the unexpected in depositions.”

4. 4. The “one-and-done” training model is broken.

The panel discussed the shortcomings of traditional deposition training, sharing that it is often:

• Infrequent
• Expensive
• Inconsistent
• Not repeatable

The speakers highlighted that associates may train once and then wait months before conducting a real deposition, causing skills to degrade. Simulation-based training allows ongoing practice, testing different strategies, witness types, and difficulty levels. “Continuous practice changes everything,” the panel emphasized.

5. 5. Real-time AI is changing what happens inside depositions

A standout moment came from attorney Todd Heffner of Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP who shared how he uses Verbit Legal Visor in his practice. Legal Visor is known for offering attorneys and legal professionals an edge by turning legal transcripts and live testimony into real-time, actionable AI-generated insights.

Built for litigation, deposition review, and case strategy, he described its AI capabilities as functioning like an “extra associate” during depositions.

Todd shared how Legal Visor:

• Provides real-time legal transcription of testimony
• Compares live statements against documents and prior testimony
• Flags inconsistencies that can inform new lines of questioning

He added, “In many cases, flagged inconsistencies reinforce what I already prepared for, but occasionally they surface new insights in the moment, giving me an edge.”

Todd emphasized, “The best AI tools are those that make you better at what you already do – not a panacea for everything.” This reflects how leading attorneys are using AI today: as real-time litigation support, not a replacement for preparation or expertise.

6. 6. AI should augment judgment – not replace it.

Using AI responsibly was also a key point that the panel addressed.

They recommended best practices for using AI:

• Use AI when outputs can be verified against source material
• Use it for ideation where perfect accuracy isn’t required
• Keep a human in the loop for high-stakes decisions

“In legal tech – especially areas like legal transcription, deposition analysis, and document review – traceability and verification are essential,” one panelist said.

7. 7. The conversation is shifting from efficiency to performance

Panelists noted that for years, legal AI was framed around saving time and reducing costs. “Clients care more about outcomes than efficiency,” the panel noted.

The most valuable AI tools improve legal performance. This includes better preparation, sharper arguments, and stronger execution in real time to perform in-the-moment and win cases.

8. 8. AI is delivering value across attorney experience levels.

The panel highlighted that when used effectively AI presents benefits both junior and senior lawyers. They noted that:

• Junior associates can use AI to gain guidance and training support.
• Senior attorneys can use AI to do things like refine written arguments, test litigation strategies, and identify weak points.
• Both junior and senior attorneys can benefit from using generative AI tools to reveal insights and inconsistencies on transcripts of their legal proceedings.

AI increasingly acts as a strategic feedback layer, enhancing decision-making rather than merely boosting productivity. “It’s not just a productivity tool – it’s a performance multiplier,” the panel shared.

9. 9. Trust in AI depends on understanding its limitations.

A recurring theme that came up was also that AI isn’t perfect, and that’s okay and expected. Here are some key items to consider when using it:

• Compare adopting AI to the existing alternatives (e.g., junior associates, manual review) to weigh the pros and cons and individual use cases
• Be transparent about AI’s limitations
• Train attorneys and team members on proper usage of AI
• Reinforce verification as part of your workflow

10. 10. Training is becoming a competitive advantage

Junior associate training is key, and firms are expected to produce practice-ready lawyers faster. AI-enabled training, such as DepoSim, can be used to support this need by:

• Accelerating skill development
• Providing consistent, scalable learning
• Allowing associates to build confidence before live work and high stakes scenarios

“Training can now be a differentiator for client value,” the panel shared.

11. 11. Human skills are becoming more (not less) important

Despite AI advances, it should come as no surprise that core legal skills, including critical thinking, communication, curiosity, and real-time decision-making remain critical. AI supports these but cannot replace them.

As one panelist put it, “As technology handles more routine tasks, human capabilities become even more important.”