Between the Briefs

AI can give you an answer in seconds but that doesn’t mean it’s the right answer. 


In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Patrick Baker, law professor at University of Tennessee at Martin and Founder of Baker Law Firm, for a practical conversation on legal education, AI, critical thinking, law school reform and what it really means to think like a lawyer.


Plus, Patrick’s hottest take: AI is built to please you and lawyers would do well to remember that AI is built to please you and lawyers should remember that shouldn't be the priority


What You'll Learn:

• Why Patrick believes a JD teaches critical thinking beyond traditional legal practice
• Why AI can weaken legal thinking when students use it before building the basics
• How Patrick separates AI use between introductory and advanced law classes
• Why students need tools to verify AI output instead of blindly trusting it
• Why real wills, trusts, contracts and court documents help students understand the law
• Why IRAC isn’t just a writing structure, but a way lawyers think
• How rural practice changes the lawyer’s role in the community
• Why law schools may need more regular assessments instead of one final exam for everything
• Why AI’s biggest legal danger is that it sounds confident even when it is wrong
  
  

AI can help lawyers and students move faster, but only if they already know how to think, question, verify and tell the difference between a useful answer and a dangerous one.


Highlights:

01:01 Introduction

02:02 Patrick’s Path From Teaching to Law

04:29 Does AI Weaken Critical Thinking?

06:20 Patrick’s Rules for AI in the Classroom

07:44 What Law Students Miss About Business

10:15 Practicing Law in Rural America

14:12 Finding Purpose Through Guardian Ad Litem Work

16:35 Bringing Real-World Cases Into the Classroom

18:40 Patrick’s Soft Socratic Teaching Style

20:51 What Law School Needs to Change

22:09 Should Law Schools Teach More AI?

23:05 What Makes a Better Professor?

24:49 How Farm Work Shaped Patrick’s Career

27:27 Farming for Mental Health

27:54 How Law School Teaches Critical Thinking

28:32 IRAC as a Way of Thinking

30:50 Knowing Your Audience in Rural Practice

35:16 Why Local Expertise Matters

35:49 Who Should Actually Go to Law School?

38:22 Does the Bar Exam Still Work?

39:30 Should the Bar Exam Be More Practical?

41:56 Why There Have Always Been “Too Many Lawyers”

42:21 Patrick’s Hot Take: AI in Law

44:59 Closing Thoughts


Quotes:

• “Having a law degree is probably, in my opinion, the best graduate degree on the market because it just teaches you how to think” 

• “You still have to have the critical thinking skills to discern whether or not it’s correct.”

• “If I misidentify the problem, I am not going to get the result that I want.”

• “It’s not my job to tell you what you want to hear. It’s my job to tell you objectively where things stand.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

Brian Amero became a naturalized American citizen in 2001. By 2007, he was an elected Superior Court judge in Georgia. Over nearly two decades on the bench, he set out to find better answers than incarceration for problems that jail was never going to solve.

In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Brian, a former Chief Superior Court Judge in Georgia and now Litigation Counsel at Bennett International Group, for a candid conversation about criminal justice reform, mental illness in local jails, access to justice and what a judge can do beyond the ruling. Brian explains why he brought drug courts to Henry County, how he built a parental accountability program that replaced automatic jail time for child support nonpayment with a path to steady work, and how that program eventually reached every judicial district in Georgia.

The conversation then turns to what Brian calls a human rights problem in our own backyards: people with severe and persistent mental illness who are incarcerated far too frequently. Brian walks through how a minor incident can turn into months behind bars while a defendant waits for a competency evaluation and restoration, why public defenders and prosecutors often overlook the civil-side resources that could help, and why he believes the civil and criminal systems need to be woven together. He and the hosts also discuss how to give judges, prosecutors and public defenders a reason to take this work on, why leadership at the top matters, and how a divided public can show up in the jury box.

And then there is Brian's hottest take: too many people are getting out of jury service, and the people trying hardest to avoid it are often the ones the system needs most.


What You'll Learn:

• How Brian's path from naturalized citizen to elected Superior Court judge shaped how he approached the job
• Why drug courts work as "courts of second chances" by addressing the underlying addiction instead of incarcerating people for it
• How the parental accountability program replaced jail time for child support nonpayment with case management, work requirements and a steady flow of support
• How a local program expanded to every judicial district in Georgia through conversations, budget requests and willing partners
• Why exercising prosecutorial discretion and exercising judicial discretion are not that different, according to Brian
• How a low-level incident can lead to months of incarceration for a person with severe mental illness before a competency evaluation even begins
• Why public defenders and prosecutors should be trained in mental health issues and the civil-side resources available to their clients
• Why Brian believes civil and criminal services should be woven together to manage mental illness in the justice system
• Why incentives, stipends and team-based approaches could help get judges, prosecutors and public defenders involved
• Why Brian thinks fixing this problem needs leadership at the state and national level, and better storytelling to make the public care
• How a politically divided community can show up in the jury box
• Why Brian thinks too many people are getting out of jury service
  
  

The big takeaway: Judges, lawyers and communities can build a more humane system, but it takes leadership, resources and people willing to give a little extra time to something that matters.


Quotes:

1.      “Everybody in that system loses.”

2.      “Judges want to do the right thing. They really want to engage in reforms that make their communities better.”

3.      “This is like Kafka’s The Trial.”

4.      “I consider this to be a human rights problem right in our own backyards.”

5.      “Everybody wants to feel like they’re a part of something that they can be proud of.”

6.      “Set everything aside, go do your civic duty.”



Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

AI is not a strategy. 


Sure, it’s a powerful tool but still, only one piece of the puzzle.


In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with John Koss, Chief Innovation and AI Officer at Mintz, for a practical conversation on legal AI, innovation strategy, knowledge management, law firm data, legal education, vendor relationships and what it actually takes to make new technology useful inside a law firm.


What You’ll Learn:

• Why John sees innovation as much broader than AI
• How people, process, and technology shape real law firm change
• How Mintz measures early ROI on AI tools through adoption, usage, and engagement
• Why usage is only the baseline, not the full ROI story
• How experimentation becomes a repeatable “Mintz way” of doing legal work
• Why chasing every new AI tool creates scattered results
• Why AI adoption has become easier than earlier legal tech shifts like technology-assisted review
• What law schools should and should not be expected to teach about AI
• Why mentorship and judgment still need to be taught inside firms
• Why a single source of truth for firm data is foundational but deeply unglamorous work
• What legal tech vendors need to understand before pitching law firms
• Why nobody has the future of legal AI fully figured out yet
  
  

The big takeaway: AI strategy is not about panic-buying tools. It is about knowing your problems, choosing your path, building the workflow, and bringing people with you.


Highlights:
00:00 Introduction00:51 John’s Path From Litigation to Legal Tech02:52 What a Chief Innovation and AI Officer Actually Does03:03 Why Innovation Is Bigger Than AI04:24 Moving From Legal Work to Business Strategy06:01 Measuring AI Adoption and ROI06:37 Why Usage Is Only the Starting Point08:34 Turning Experimentation Into Repeatable Workflows09:45 The Biggest Challenge in AI Adoption09:59 Why John Avoids Calling Firm Missteps “Mistakes”12:52 Getting Buy-In From Lawyers13:46 Why AI Adoption Is Easier Than Earlier Legal Tech Shifts17:52 How Law Schools Are Responding to AI18:19 What Law Schools Should Teach About Legal AI22:01 The Risk of Over-Automating Legal Learning23:03 Teaching Judgment in the Age of AI27:49 Building a Single Source of Truth28:09 Why Firm Data Strategy Is Foundational31:14 What Legal Tech Vendors Get Right and Wrong31:53 Why Customer Success Matters After the Sale36:23 John’s Hot Take: Nobody Has This Fully Figured Out38:32 Closing Thoughts
Quotes:

1. “Innovation to me is much broader than just AI.”
2. “Technology’s one of those three legs of the stool.”
3. “How do we take experimentation and turn it into something that’s kind of a repeatable workflow or use case?”
4. “We’re not a bunch of dummies.”
5. “We are really all in this together.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

Maxwell Weiss has investigated everything from stolen historical artifacts and match fixing to counterfeit medicines, privacy violations and questionable health plans. Now, he is working at the intersection of plaintiff-side litigation and AI-powered case discovery. 

In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Maxwell Weiss, a partner at Don Bivens and Litigation Counsel at Darrow AI, to unpack how lawyers can find the facts that actually matter, investigate complex wrongdoing and use technology to uncover cases that traditional methods may never reach. Maxwell explains the 80/20 rule he applies to litigation, why brevity matters in legal writing, what federal judges taught him about courtroom advocacy and why the best lawyers often sound more like they are having a conversation than delivering a performance.

The conversation also gets into Darrow AI and how technology can monitor prices, identify potential privacy violations and analyze complicated health-plan structures at a scale that would be nearly impossible for lawyers to handle manually. Maxwell explains how those findings are turned into something lawyers can actually use: a clear case theory, the relevant law, precedent and an evidentiary roadmap.


And then there is Maxwell’s biggest concern about AI: junior lawyers may become so dependent on it that they skip the foundational work that teaches them judgment in the first place.


What You’ll Learn:

• How Maxwell applies the 80/20 rule to litigation strategy and focuses time on the facts that actually drive a case
• Why investigative work often requires lawyers to bring in private investigators, technical experts and other specialists
• What Maxwell learned from his federal clerkship about brevity, courtroom advocacy and communicating with judges
• Why strong advocacy looks more like a conversation than a rehearsed courtroom performance
• How class actions can create meaningful relief by stopping harmful conduct, not just recovering money
• How AI can surface potential privacy violations, misleading pricing practices and health-plan problems at a scale that would be difficult to investigate manually 
• Why translating AI findings into clear legal analysis is still a deeply human part of the process
• How lawyers identify and recruit strong named plaintiffs for class action cases
• Why Maxwell is concerned that AI could leave junior lawyers without the foundational skills needed for good legal judgment
  
  

The big takeaway: AI can expand the scale of legal investigation, but lawyers still need the judgment to turn what they find into a real case. 


Highlights:

00:00 Introduction
01:25 The Stolen Artifact Investigation
03:52 Maxwell’s Unusual Path Through Big Law and Federal Court
05:05 Investigating Counterfeit HIV Medicines
08:01 The 80/20 Rule for Litigation Strategy
09:10 How Lawyers Actually Investigate Complex Cases
11:19 The Ethics of Representing Clients
14:00 Why Brevity Matters in Legal Writing
15:30 What Federal Court Taught Maxwell About Advocacy
18:04 The Real Purpose of Class Actions
21:31 How Darrow AI Finds Hidden Legal Wrongdoing
24:46 The Problem With Dominated Health Plans
27:34 AI Cases That Would Never Be Found Manually
28:59 Will Lawyers Actually Adopt Legal AI?
30:42 What Happens When Both Sides Have AI?
31:47 Maxwell’s Next Big Litigation Target
35:17 Why Purpose Drives Maxwell’s Practice
36:45 Using Targeted Advertising to Find Plaintiffs
38:42 What Makes a Good Named Plaintiff?
41:27 The Emotional Side of Plaintiff Litigation
42:28 Maxwell’s Biggest Fear About AI and Junior Lawyers
43:47 Closing Thoughts

Quotes:

1. “The 80/20 rule is just so true.”
2. “The best advocates are having a conversation with the jury or the judge.”
3. “You don’t have to be absolutely perfectly polished.”
4. “I worry that junior lawyers will grow to rely on artificial intelligence so much that they’ll never get the basic skills.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

75+ episodes. 1,200+ followers. A new look. A bottle of hot sauce. And a legal industry that is changing faster than most people can keep up with.

In this special episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, hosts Joe Stephens and Adrian Cea record live from ILTACON 2026 to reflect on the conversations, guests, hot takes and recurring themes that have shaped the show so far.

Join them as they revisit standout guests including Elaine Barsom, Colin Levy, Eric Friedman, Andrew Finkelstein, Matthew Pringle, Bob Simon, Katie DeBorde, and others, while also introducing the show’s new Hot Takes hot sauce.

What You’ll Learn:

• Why “go slow to go fast” keeps coming up in legal AI conversations
• Why AI is better understood as leverage, not a lawyer replacement
• How legal tech is changing firm structures, billing models, hiring, training and education
• Why law schools are still figuring out which AI skills actually matter
• Why empathy, relatability and storytelling remain major legal advantages
• How guest conversations have shaped Joe and Adrian’s view of the industry
• Why attorney-client privilege and consumer AI use are becoming urgent client-counseling issues
• Why judges and clerks keep coming back to the same advice: be brief
• How private equity, remote-first firms, and AI-driven models are shifting the business of law
• Why the rebrand marks a new chapter for Between the Briefs, not a reset

This episode is a milestone, a reintroduction and a reminder that the future of legal innovation will not be built by technology alone. It will be built by people who know how to use it well.

Quotes:

1. “We’ve hit over 75 episodes now. We’ve had some amazing guests.”
2. “It’s not about matching that pace. It’s actually about being methodical and thoughtful about how you adopt, when you adopt, how you change.”
3. “AI is there to assist, free up space, allow you to do the job that you spent a lot of time preparing to be brilliant at, which is exercise judgment.”
4. “You can use AI to optimize, change the way things are done, but you’re still working with people.”
5. “Sometimes you want to say a million things, but the best thing that you can say can live in three paragraphs or three pages instead of 10.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

Personal injury law has a lot of big promises, big ads and big firms. Nicole Brenecki is more interested in what actually works.

In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Nicole, Founding Partner at Jodré Brenecki LLP, for a candid conversation on personal injury litigation, boutique firm strategy, client service, New York court delays, fraud scrutiny, AI and why efficiency matters more than size.

What You’ll Learn:

• Why firm size can become a marketing gimmick when service breaks down
• Why Nicole’s firm files suit on most cases immediately after intake
• How small firms can use speed and coordination as a competitive advantage
• Why New York’s fragmented court system makes client expectation-setting so important
• How multilingual advocacy helps clients better understand the legal process
• Why hiring for intelligence and instinct can matter more than resume polish
• How Nicole uses AI for narrow tasks without giving up the personal touch
• Why judges with overloaded dockets need clear, concise arguments
• Why legal professionals need to cut through inefficiency instead of building careers around it

The crux of this episode: Building a firm with zero capital into a small but sharp personal injury practice that handles hundreds of cases with speed and intention. 

Highlights:

00:00 Introduction
01:05 Nicole’s Media Work and Legal Commentary
01:29 Preparing for Live TV Legal Analysis
03:28 Nicole’s International Legal Background
03:53 Comparing Statutory and Precedent-Based Legal Systems
05:45 Explaining the Legal Process to Multilingual Clients
07:09 How Personal Injury Litigation Has Changed
07:18 Why Nicole Files Suit on Most Cases Right Away
08:45 Keeping Up With New York’s Court Rules
11:03 Small Firm vs. Big Firm Client Service
11:36 Why Bigger Does Not Always Mean Better
14:48 Nicole’s Hiring Philosophy
14:58 Why Intelligence Beats Resume Obsession
16:44 The Skills Nicole Believes Are Hard to Teach
17:34 Developing Litigation Instinct
20:39 How Nicole Uses Technology in Her Firm
20:51 Why AI Is Useful, But Limited
23:31 Nicole’s Intake Process and Fraud Red Flags
23:57 Why Fraud Scrutiny Is Hitting Ethical Firms Too
29:21 Multilingual Advocacy and Client Expectations
29:43 Why Language Is a Tool for Trust
31:40 Underrated Litigation Skills
31:58 Why Brevity Matters in Court
35:58 Nicole’s Work in Music and New York Tracks
38:47 What Event Production Taught Her About Business
40:28 Nicole’s Long-Term Motivation
42:39 Nicole’s Hot Take: Legal Inefficiency Hurts Everyone
43:59 Closing Thoughts

Quotes:

1. “It’s just a marketing gimmick that you get more with a greater size. Very often you get less with a greater size because there’s just so many people and the work is so compartmentalized.”
2. “If you’re intelligent, you can learn anything.”
3. “Use AI as a tool and not as a replacement of you.”
4. “Stop going in circles for your own benefit. Try cutting through the inefficiency.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

Paralegals are the people attorneys rely on when deadlines are tight, documents are moving fast and the work needs to get done right.

But they’re often treated as background support.

In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Christina Carter, Senior Manager of Firm-Wide Paralegal Management at Venable, for a practical conversation on paralegal leadership, legal operations, team culture, generational dynamics, AI adoption and what law firms often miss about the people who keep the work moving.

What You’ll Learn:

• Why paralegal management should be treated as strategic operations
• How Christina supports 80+ professionals across practice groups and career stages
• Why law firms need to recognize paralegal work before people burn out or leave
• How proactive staffing helps prevent retention problems before they start
• How onboarding should be shaped around the person, the practice group and the culture
• Why AI should be used as an assistant, not treated as the leader of the work
• How paralegals can use the “one step ahead” mindset to become indispensable
• Why treating people like humans is still the best management principle out there

Strong legal teams are not built only around attorneys. They are built around the people who anticipate needs, hold the work together and make everyone else look better.

Highlights:

00:00 Introduction
01:27 What Firm-Wide Paralegal Management Actually Means
01:39 Supporting 80+ Paralegal Professionals Across Venable
03:23 Why Christina Is the Gears of the Law Firm
04:26 Christina’s Path From Aspiring Attorney to Paralegal Leadership
04:51 Starting at Skadden and Learning Law Firms From the Inside
07:52 Why Paralegals Do Not Get Enough Credit
08:41 How Venable Recognizes Paralegal Contributions
11:40 When Law Firms Need a Paralegal Manager
11:55 Why Staffing Requires One-Step-Ahead Thinking
14:21 Managing Across Generations
14:51 How Community Bridges Generational Gaps
17:31 How Christina Onboards New Paralegals
17:55 Why Training Has to Be Individualized
20:38 Christina’s Management Principles
21:09 Treating People Like Humans, Not Headcount
24:17 How AI Is Changing Paralegal Work
24:39 Why Technology Should Be Your Assistant
27:38 Coaching Paralegals Through AI Anxiety
28:34 Why Human Judgment Still Matters
32:55 Advice for New Paralegals
33:25 The One-Step-Ahead Mindset
37:56 What Dance Taught Christina About Community
38:27 Why Relationships Matter in Legal Careers
40:54 Christina’s Hot Take: Legal is Having an Evolution Moment
43:35 Closing Thoughts

Quotes:

1. “My role is very much on a strategic level.”
2. “Treat every individual as an individual and see them as such.”
3. “Use that technology to be your assistant versus being the leader of the work that you do.”
4. “Not knowing about it, not learning about it, not becoming comfortable with it isn’t going to make it go away.”
5. “You really need to think about things from a one-step-ahead mindset.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

Litigation does not begin when a lawsuit is filed. By then, the story has often already been written in contracts, emails, missed deadlines and the very human decision to wait because “maybe it’ll blow over.”

In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Kat Mateo, Counsel of Litigation at Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP, for a practical, lively conversation about what clients, founders, business owners and legal teams often misunderstand about litigation.

What You’ll Learn:

• Why clients should involve attorneys before disputes escalate
• How litigators can spot risks in deals that transactional teams may miss
• Why most cases are won or lost on papers, not dramatic courtroom moments
• How emotional emails, sarcasm and jokes can become serious evidence
• Why discovery now reaches work emails, personal phones, WhatsApp, Signal, Slack and social media
• Why attorneys can manage bad facts, but not surprise facts
• How storytelling helps juries understand complex commercial disputes

Good litigation strategy is not just about fighting well. It is about preventing problems early, documenting carefully, communicating wisely and knowing when to call the lawyer before things get expensive.

Highlights:

00:00 Introduction
01:09 Kat’s Journey From the Dominican Republic to Litigation
03:44 How Culture and Community Shape Kat’s Advocacy
05:04 The Pressure and Responsibility of Being First-Gen
07:08 Staying Hungry Through a Hard Journey
08:50 Kat’s Advice for First-Gen and Immigrant Law Students
10:52 Why Litigation Starts Before the Lawsuit
11:16 The Biggest Mistake Clients Make Before Litigation
15:01 What People Misunderstand About Litigators
15:36 Why Most Cases Never Go to Trial
16:41 Why Emotional Emails Can Wreck a Case
18:06 The Courtroom Poster Test for Client Communications
21:22 Why Clients Should Never Hide Bad Facts
25:16 Why Storytelling Matters in Litigation
25:47 The Difference Between Truth and What You Can Prove
30:15 How Kat Approaches Storytelling for Juries
34:38 Kat’s Love-Hate Relationship With AI
35:33 The AI Privilege Trap Clients Need to Understand
38:51 What Kat Learned Inside a Judge’s Chambers
39:34 How Judges Really Approach Decisions
43:55 Kat’s Hot Take on Technology and Lawyers
44:48 Closing Thoughts

Quotes:

1. “Usually cases are not hard because the law is hard. They’re hard because of the decisions the clients have made before litigation even commenced.”
2. “The biggest mistake that I see clients make is that they don’t involve attorneys early enough.”
3. “Most cases are won or lost on papers.”
4. “I can deal with bad facts. I can’t deal with surprise facts.”
5. “Technology is changing what things look like, but it doesn’t mean that lawyers go away.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

Leadership in law is often treated like something that comes after the promotion, after the title or after someone hands you a team and assumes you magically know what to do with them.

Nicole Lester Arrindell sees it differently. In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Nicole, Head of State Regulatory and Legislative Affairs and Associate General Counsel at Equitable, for a wide-ranging conversation on servant leadership, legal education, public service, in-house counsel, mentorship, and what it actually means to lead in the legal profession.

What You’ll Learn:

• Why leadership is not about a title, but about how you show up in any role
• How Nicole’s South Side Chicago upbringing shaped her commitment to service
• Why the people closest to the issue often understand it better than anyone else
• How in-house lawyers can become business partners instead of the “department of no”
• Why “soft skills” should be treated as core legal skills
• What law schools should teach about client relationships, team management, and communication
• Why students need to practice presenting ideas, even if they never plan to litigate

This episode is a reminder that legal excellence is more about judgment, empathy, communication, influence and the ability to help people get where they are trying to go, than about sheer knowledge. 

Highlights:

00:59 Welcome to Between the Briefs
01:36 Meeting Nicole Lester Arrindell
03:04 Nicole’s Career & The Through-Line of Service
04:45 Community Service on Chicago’s South Side
07:37 Teaching the Next Generation of Lawyers
10:19 Everyday People Can Be Everyday Leaders
12:12 The Kind of Leadership That’s Actually Valuable 
12:36 Nicole’s Career GPS: Goals, Purpose and Skills
13:57 Why Self-Reflection Matters in Leadership Development
16:24 Lessons From Legal Aid and Chief of Staff Roles
16:54 Why the People Closest to the Issue Know It Best
18:45 Legal Leadership Means Figuring It Out Together
19:21 Nicole’s Role in State Regulatory and Legislative Affairs
21:48 Why “Soft Skills” Are Really Core Skills
24:29 Nicole’s Work as an Adjunct Professor
24:38 Bringing Practical Lawyering Into the Classroom
28:18 What Nicole Hopes Her Students Take With Them
30:42 Being a Partner to the Client, Not the Department of No
33:04 Leading the Metropolitan Black Bar Association
36:01 Nicole’s Journey With the MBBA
39:24 Protecting the Rule of Law
40:42 Leadership as Practice, Not Position
41:35 Nicole’s Hot Take: AI Fluency
42:32 Closing Thoughts

Quotes:

1. “Everyday people can be everyday leaders.”
2. “You don’t have to have the big title or the fancy position in order to demonstrate leadership.”
3. “The people closest to the issue understood it better than I could.”
4. “We’re not the department of no. We’re the department of “let’s figure it out.”
5. “The fact that you were a great litigator does not now mean you can manage 20 of them.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so

Everyone claims AI will revolutionize legal, but Kara Peterson and Richard DiBona want to fix the systemic bottlenecks that have broken the system for decades.

In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Kara and Richard, cofounders of Descrybe, an AI company focused on making the law easier to find, understand, and verify. Their story began during the pandemic, when a personal legal issue pushed them into the frustrating reality of trying to understand and access the law as nonlawyers. That experience became the starting point for a platform designed to make legal information more accessible, accurate and affordable.

What You’ll Learn:

• Why the justice gap is fundamentally an operational supply-and-demand mismatch.
• How inaccurate AI outputs could trigger harsh judicial regulations.
• Why Descrybe moved from D2C pro se tools to empowering legal aid providers.
• How issue-level citation analysis outperforms traditional "good law/bad law" tools.
• Why high-quality legal tech does not require enterprise pricing tags.

This episode is a grounded look at what responsible legal AI can actually do: not replace lawyers, not magically fix the system overnight, but give under-resourced legal professionals better tools to serve more people.

Highlights:

00:00 Introduction

01:09 Kara and Richard’s Unusual Founder Story

02:21 Why Access to Justice Matters in Legal AI

02:51 AI, Legal Demand, and the Justice Gap

04:29 How AI Could Make the Gap Smaller or Bigger

05:10 Richard’s Software Engineering Background

06:58 Building From Harvard’s Case Law Access Project

07:33 Why Access to Justice Is Like a Public Health Issue

08:41 The Hallucination Problem in Legal AI

09:46 Why Descrybe Builds for Attorneys and Legal Aid Providers

13:02 Why Legal Research Is More Complex Than It Looks

13:27 The Moment They Learned About Shepardizing

14:36 Why Legal Librarians Matter So Much

16:29 Issue-Level Citation Analysis

19:03 The Four Levels of AI Accuracy in Legal Research

21:40 Why Foundation Models Will Not Eat Everything

23:47 How Descrybe’s Anthropic Collaboration Happened

25:36 What the Claude for Legal Launch Changed

27:49 Why Courts Need Better Hallucination-Checking Tools

29:31 How Descrybe’s Brief Checker Works

31:23 Scaling After the Anthropic Collaboration

33:22 Why Fair Pricing Matters in Legal Tech

36:10 Advice for AI Founders

39:03 Why the Legal AI Ecosystem Matters

40:03 Why Kara Does Not Believe in Declaring War on Incumbents

42:19 Kara and Richard’s Hot Takes on Legal AI

45:49 Final Thoughts

Quotes:

1. “We can’t “human” our way out of this problem. It’s just too labor intensive, there’s too much need, the cost structures don’t work. People can’t afford lawyers.”
2. “AI could either make the justice gap smaller or bigger.”
3. “We realized the better we could serve people serving the people who need to be served is where we could actually have the most impact.”
4. “Legal tech is really weird. You don’t have to trade really good tech for fair pricing.”
5. “Not everyone needs these gigantic end-to-end solutions.”

Between The Briefs is handcrafted by our friends over at: fame.so