Technological Proficiency Is an Ethical Duty

• Pages: 2-3
• Date: 01 July 2025
• Published date: 01 July 2025
• Author: William H. Newman
• Subject Matter: Administrative & Public Law

Published i n Litigation News Volu me 50, Number 4 , Summer 2025. © 2 025 by the Americ an Bar Associa tion. Reprodu ced with permiss ion. All rights r eserved. Thi s information or any p ortion

thereof may not b e copied or dis seminated in a ny form or by any mea ns or stored in a n electroni c database or r etrieval syst em without the ex press writt en consent of th e American B ar Associa tion.

By William H . Newman, Litigation News Associate Ed itor

Technological Prociency Is an

Ethical Duty

propose that the current minimum technological competency a

litigator should possess includes the following.

First, litigators should know how to electronically le docu-

ments with courts. Many courts require lawyers to be familiar

with electronic ling rules when seeking admission to practice.

But many lawyers continue to practice in a court, even when

the court adopts new ling systems they may not easily use.

Lawyers rely on junior associates and paralegals to le for

them, but not using the ling system directly makes a lawyer

dependent on others and exposes the lawyer to mistakes from

miscommunication. And since electronic ling often has arcane

rules about how to classify certain lings, delegating ling to

someone else means either that someone else will be making

decisions about the lings or the senior lawyer will inevitably

have to make guesses when directing a junior person’s use of

an online platform the senior lawyer cannot use.

Second, litigators should know how spreadsheets work.

A great deal of business relies on the use of spreadsheets to

compile and calculate numbers. Lawyers need to know the

difference between a table in a text document and the cells of

a spreadsheet for several reasons. The formulas in a spread-

sheet may contain important information about how a party

calculated an important gure. And litigators who are unfa-

miliar with spreadsheets may miss important information in a

hidden column or a separate tab that experienced users may

catch. Spreadsheet literacy is therefore important to identify

important information.

Third, litigators should know how to gather documents for a

document production. This includes downloading text messages

from phones, applications, and social media, as well as search-

ing hard drives and cloud drives, and exporting email accounts.

I know that this sounds like the work of IT professionals, but

© Getty Image s

litigator in 1990 sits in a room full of bankers boxes

reading paper documents and taking handwritten

notes. She nds an interesting item and wants to

conrm its legal signicance. She walks to her rm’s

law library and consults the pocket part of an

annotated statute book. Her job barely resembles her counter-

part’s today.

Technological advancement is nothing new. And lawyers

frequently respond by dismissing its relevance and delegating

its adoption to a younger generation. Many take pride in being

an adherent of the old school. Ethical rules, however, demand

more. And while those rules are deliberately vague to adapt to

changes, there should be some concrete computer skills that

litigators possess in 2025.

A Proposed Min imum Level of Technologic al

Competence for a Litigator

Lawyers have a duty to stay abreast of technology. Comment

8 of ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1 says that:

To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a

lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law

and its practice, including the benets and risks

associated with relevant technology, engage in con-

tinuing study and education and comply with all

continuing legal education requirements to which

the lawyer is subject.

Many state rules of professional conduct include the same

commentary. And while numerous commentators have stressed

the importance of this duty, there is still no generally accepted

statement of what technology litigators should know. And so I

SUMMER 2 025 • VOL. 50 NO. 4

2 | A BA LITIGATION SECTION

TECHNOLOGY