• Mark Lanier said he used AI before and during the social media addiction trial earlier this year.
• Lanier, who won the case against Meta and Google, said AI has transformed his workflow.
• He swears by an AI tool that he pays six figures annually for called Boodlebox.

One morning in February, Mark Lanier woke up after four hours of sleep and started preparing to cross-examine one of the wealthiest people in the world: Mark Zuckerberg.

His team had worked through the night, preparing material for the day ahead that he could then review in the hours before court, all with the help of AI.

Lanier, a nationally known Texas trial lawyer with a reputation for taking on major corporations in high-stakes trials, was representing the plaintiff in a landmark social media addiction case. He said AI allowed his team to do significantly more with the limited hours they had to prep outside the courtroom during the trial, which lasted over a month.

"It's as if I have 10 additional workers who are incredibly well-trained, who know the file inside and out, who work 24 hours a day and don't even need to take a break for the restroom, much less PTO," he told Business Insider, adding, "In the 10 hours I might be working outside of court, I can get 30 hours of work done."

AI in law has been touted both as a major opportunity and a cautionary tale, with many stories of hallucinations and fake citations. While the legal industry grapples with how to use AI, Lanier said it's been a "total game changer" for him.

Lanier won the case against Meta and Google, in which the jury found the companies negligent and ruled they knew their platforms were "dangerous" but failed to warn the plaintiff, who was awarded $6 million. The case was a bellwether for thousands of similar lawsuits brought against social media companies.

While Lanier had used the most popular AI products, he said the AI tool he relied on before and during the trial was Boodlebox, calling it "Disney World compared to a swing set in the backyard."

A leader in the education technology space, Boodlebox provides access to major models like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, allowing users to switch between them or compare results. It's also collaborative, allowing Lanier and his team of lawyers to work with the AIs in the same digital workspace.

Lanier worked with Boodlebox to create a custom license that costs him six figures annually and is tailored to his needs.

"We could, in essence, take my brain, take 42 years of my experience, take the things that I have learned and studied and published and not published and incorporate it into the brain that drove my AI queries and results," he said.

He relied on AI before and during the landmark trial

Lanier is careful when talking specifics about how he deploys his AI. He says it's a matter of "trade craft" and that his firm is "doing some things that nobody else is doing."

One example he gave included taking transcripts from court each day and asking different models to evaluate them. He said AI is also great for finding a more creative or visceral way to describe something in court. He even would feed AI jury notes that came up during deliberations and ask it to evaluate where the jury was in the process.

At the end of court each day, they'd meet in his war room, debrief, and assign tasks to everyone, such as pulling the five most critical documents supporting point A. The team would then break and do much of that work in Boodlebox, allowing him to review what they've put together and how. He said he and his team, which includes several of his daughters, spent thousands of hours on the platform.

While most of Boodlebox's clients are big universities, a company representative told Business Insider that the platform is also exploring more enterprise and law adoption, in part because of its work with Lanier.

Lanier said he doesn't use AI in the way that often gets people into trouble. "I'm not going to say, 'Go do my research and write my brief,'" he said, adding that there was one instance in the case where AI cited something from the record and he knew it wasn't correct.

"It's not unbridled," he said. "You are an important part of the equation."

His advice to other lawyers trying to use AI was to keep up with the developments in the rapidly evolving field. He has an AI team at his firm that sends him a document every Friday with all the developments in AI, typically three pages single-spaced.

"Next trial, I will make what I did last trial look like Fred Flintstone and the Stone Age," he said.

• Sam Altman showed up in court as jury selection began in a civil trial between him and Elon Musk.
• Some potential jurors offered unfavorable views about AI — and Musk.
• Musk sued OpenAI, Altman, and OpenAI president Greg Brockman two years ago.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman made an unexpected appearance in a California courtroom Monday as jury selection in his high-stakes legal feud with Elon Musk kicked off.

Altman, who wore a dark-colored suit and white shirt, was spotted inside the Oakland courtroom, where some potential jurors in the federal civil trial shared unfavorable views about artificial intelligence — and Musk, the world's richest man.

"Elon doesn't care about people, just like our president," one prospective juror told US District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.

The man, who works in construction and described himself as a "meme junky" and a "dying breed" who still gets print newspaper subscriptions, added that he thinks Musk only cares about money.

Another prospective juror who works for the city of Oakland said he has a strong opinion about Musk. He said that he would do his "best" to approach the case without bias, even though he called Musk a "jerk" in a pre-trial jury questionnaire.

Musk was not in attendance for day one of the trial between two of the tech industry's most powerful billionaires. Since it is a civil trial, the parties are not required to appear unless they are testifying. Up until now, Musk and Altman have largely left the matter to their lawyers, aside from the occasional online jab.

The Tesla CEO sued OpenAI, Altman, and OpenAI president Greg Brockman two years ago, alleging that they intentionally "deceived" him into cofounding the company with them in 2015.

Musk alleges in his lawsuit that he poured tens of millions into OpenAI to support its founding mission as a nonprofit dedicated to developing AI for the public's benefit, only for that mission to later be abandoned, in part, through the company's partnership with Microsoft. Microsoft is also named as a defendant in Musk's lawsuit.

The lawsuit seeks more than $100 billion in damages, along with sweeping changes to the structure of the $850 billion company behind ChatGPT. The case comes as OpenAI is reportedly preparing for an initial public offering.

Earlier Monday, Musk and OpenAI traded barbs on Musk's X platform about the case, with Musk referring to Altman as "Scam Altman" and OpenAI ripping Musk's lawsuit as a "baseless and jealous bid to derail a competitor."

Musk is expected to testify in the weeks-long trial, along with Altman and other tech execs like Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella.

Some potential jurors questioned on Monday told the court that they had reservations surrounding AI.

A registered nurse said she doesn't trust AI and isn't a fan of how the rapidly advancing technology is being used in the workplace.

"It's just giving me more work to do," said the woman who explained that her employer uses AI tools to process patient records that she still has to review for errors.

One woman who works in the psychiatric patient care unit at Stanford University said she had some concerns about AI but could approach the case with an open mind.

"I personally don't use it much because I do find that I have to double check everything, and at this point, I might as well do it myself," said the woman, who was ultimately chosen to sit on the jury.

A different juror prospect, a PhD student in genetics, said she has a ChatGPT subscription and uses it, along with Anthropic's Claude, to write code and emails.

Concerns of the juror prospects were also reflected outside the courthouse, where protesters gathered to demonstrate against AI. A person in a robot suit wore a sign that said, "Altman's AI enslaver." A giant inflatable tube figure read: "Elon sucks."

By the end of Monday, nine jurors were selected for the trial. Opening arguments are set to begin Tuesday.

At one point, Musk's attorney, Steven Molo, asked the judge to dismiss a juror prospect who called Musk a "greedy, racist, homophobic piece of garbage" in her questionnaire and another who wrote that Musk is a "world-class jerk."

"Look, the reality is that people don't like him," the judge told Musk's legal team about their client. "But that doesn't mean that Americans, nevertheless, can't have integrity for the judicial process."