Live workshops · Law firms & legal departments
Live AI training for law firms and legal teams
Give your lawyers a repeatable way to direct AI, check its work, and deliver useful advice. In a 90-minute workshop, your team practices on realistic legal assignments and leaves with a review guide, a matter workflow, or a tested team playbook.
For associates, partners, and in-house lawyers · Virtual or in person
Share your team size, priorities, and timing. We’ll recommend a workshop and scope a proposal. No final agenda or date needed.
Experience across legal teams
Selected organizations on Write.law’s published client list:
DLA Piper LLP · Jackson Walker LLP · Loeb & Loeb LLP · Cisco Systems, Inc. · Mattel, Inc.
Feedback on our legal writing training
“Write.law’s training fundamentally changed my writing. My first drafts got better. My editing became more effective. And my final drafts became much more like the writers I admire.”
Alex Velto
Associate Attorney, Hutchison & Steffen LLP
Choose the skill your team needs next
Three workshops. Three useful outcomes.
Start with reviewing a draft, managing an assignment, or creating a shared team workflow. Each workshop connects AI skills to the judgment, sources, and reader needs that legal work requires.
Compare the work and the takeaway
Each workshop is 90 minutes. Choose the point where your team needs a more reliable way to work.
| Start here | Who it fits | What your team practices | What participants take away |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is This Ready to Send? Review an AI-assisted draft | Who it fitsAssociates, counsel, partners, and in-house lawyers who draft or review work. | PracticeCompare drafts with sources; decide what to keep, revise, verify, or remove; produce a version ready for its reader. | TakeawayAn annotated final draft and a short review guide. |
| From Assignment to Verified Deliverable Direct a legal matter | Who it fitsLawyers who have tried AI and need a repeatable process. | PracticeScope a vague request, plan intermediate checks, and update the work when instructions or sources change. | TakeawayA one-page matter workflow with inputs, checks, reviewer, unresolved questions, and handoff. |
| Build Your Team’s AI Writing Playbook Agree on a shared method | Who it fitsAn intact practice group or legal department. | PracticeUse two recurring assignments to agree on examples and review criteria, then build and test one workflow. | TakeawayOne workflow, annotated examples, permitted inputs, review checks, and an owner. Optional follow-up clinic. |
These are starting points, not prerequisites. Choose one workshop or discuss a sequence for your team.
Help me choose an AI workshopCompare team program formats
A short comparison to share with your training organizer
Write.law offers three 90-minute AI workshops for legal teams. Is This Ready to Send? focuses on reviewing a draft and produces an annotated draft and review guide. From Assignment to Verified Deliverable focuses on directing an assignment and produces a matter workflow. Build Your Team’s AI Writing Playbook helps an intact group develop one shared workflow with examples and review criteria.
We can start with the recurring assignment our team finds hardest, then discuss audience, delivery format, timing, and any course, tool, or coaching access.
01 · Review
Is This Ready to Send?
Reviewing AI-Assisted Legal Work
90 minutes · Associates, counsel, partners, and in-house lawyers
A draft can sound convincing while changing a material fact, leaving out a qualification, or failing to help the reader decide. Practice distinguishing clear wording from sound work.
Discuss this review workshopWhat your team does
Work from a short source packet and several plausible drafts. Decide what to keep, revise, verify, or remove. Support each material criticism with a source, an unmet reader need, or a reasoning gap, then produce a version you would send.
Practice a review sequence: clarify the assignment and decision; compare claims with sources; examine omissions and uncertainty; test the recommendation; improve structure and style.
Constructed examples are labeled. The exercise is a starting point: real matters may require additional sources and several review passes.
02 · Direct
From Assignment to Verified Deliverable:
Directing AI on a Legal Matter
90 minutes · Lawyers ready for a repeatable process
Turn a vague request into a defined assignment. Decide what AI should do, what context it needs, and where a lawyer needs to check the work before the final handoff.
Discuss this workflow workshopWhat your team does
Clarify the decision, recipient, deadline, sources, and constraints. Plan manageable tasks and intermediate checks, then draft, review, and revise one deliverable.
Partway through, a new instruction or contradictory source changes the assignment. Update the plan and work product while preserving the definitions, exceptions, and purpose each task needs.
03 · Build
Build Your Team’s AI Writing Playbook
90 minutes · Intact practice groups and legal departments
Optional follow-up clinic
Turn individual habits into a workflow colleagues can actually use. Agree on what good work looks like for recurring assignments and write review criteria that hold up under deadline pressure.
Discuss a team playbookWhat your team does
Start with two recurring assignments, such as a research update and a contract-risk summary. Compare examples, choose approved models, and develop one complete workflow. Test it on a fresh example with someone who did not design it.
The optional clinic brings the team back after using the workflow to address what practice revealed.
An outline to share with your team
Inside a 90-minute review workshop
Is This Ready to Send? gives associates, counsel, partners, and in-house lawyers practice reviewing AI-assisted legal work before it reaches the reader.
Participants compare four plausible drafts with a short source packet, explain what they would keep or change, and produce a useful recommendation. The task makes accuracy, qualifications, and reasoning visible alongside clear writing.
A short description to share with your training organizer
Is This Ready to Send? Reviewing AI-Assisted Legal Work is a 90-minute live workshop for associates, counsel, partners, and in-house lawyers. Participants compare plausible drafts with a short source packet, support their review decisions, and revise a deliverable they would be prepared to send. They leave with an annotated draft, a review guide with examples, and a plan for applying the sequence to a recurring assignment.
The core exercise uses constructed materials and requires no AI subscription or client documents. Discuss virtual or in-person delivery, audience, timing, and any coaching, courses, or writing-tool access in the proposal. The agreed proposal confirms the instructor, fee, format, and included resources.
A sample agenda
- 0–8 minutesDefine the decision. Read the assignment and sources. Identify what the reader needs to decide.
- 8–35 minutesReview and compare. Mark passages to keep, revise, verify, or remove. Connect each material criticism to a source, reader need, or reasoning gap.
- 35–62 minutesDiscuss and revise. Examine the difficult choices, then write an annotated reply you would be prepared to send.
- 62–83 minutesCheck and apply. Review another draft, revise your answer, and apply the sequence to a fresh task.
- 83–90 minutesPlan the next use. Choose a recurring assignment and a review check to bring back to work.
This sample agenda is adapted to the audience and agreed format. All exercise facts and drafts are constructed and labeled for teaching.
Share this outline with your training organizer. Your proposal confirms the instructor, audience, format, fee, and any course or tool access.
Try a short workshop exercise
Would you send this update?
It is Friday morning. Your client’s general counsel asks: “Can we tell the business that Monday’s companywide rollout is approved? What should we do today?” Compare the source notes with two possible replies.
All facts and drafts in this preview are constructed for teaching. Neither draft is presented as the work of a particular person or AI model.
The source notes
- General counsel, Thursday: “Monday’s pilot is approved for one team. Come back to me before expanding to other teams.”
- Operations, Friday morning: Training is complete for the pilot team. Training for the other teams has not started.
- Security, Friday morning: The pilot’s access checks passed. The broader security review is still underway, with no confirmed completion date.
Two possible replies
Draft A
Monday’s rollout is approved. Training and security checks are complete, so the business can proceed companywide.
Draft B
For Monday, it is just the pilot team that has approval, which is the point to keep in the announcement. The wider checks are unfinished, so we need dates and another approval.
Make your review decisions
Which draft gives you the better starting point? Identify what you would keep, revise, or verify. Connect each criticism to a source note or to the decision the general counsel needs to make. Then write the reply you would send.
Compare your review with the annotations
Keep the limit in Draft B. The one-team restriction is essential, even though the sentence is awkward. It preserves the scope of approval in source 1. Improve the sentence without losing that qualification.
Revise Draft A’s claim that the business can proceed companywide. It turns pilot approval into broader approval and treats pilot readiness as companywide readiness. Source 1 requires a separate decision; sources 2 and 3 distinguish the pilot from the other teams. The fluent wording does not close that reasoning gap.
Verify the dates and make the next step useful. Neither draft gives the general counsel a clear plan for today. Ask Operations for the remaining training schedule and Security for the broader review’s expected completion. Then seek the general counsel’s separate approval for a proposed expansion date. The notes do not establish when a companywide rollout will be ready.
These are review judgments grounded in this packet, not a score for either draft. A real matter may require more sources and checks.
Read one possible revision
Please hold off on announcing a companywide rollout for Monday. Your approval covers only the one-team pilot; expansion needs your separate approval.
The pilot team’s training and access checks are complete. Training for the other teams has not started, and the broader security review is still underway.
I recommend asking Operations today for the remaining training schedule and Security for its expected completion date. We can then bring a proposed expansion date back to you for approval. The current notes do not establish when a companywide rollout will be ready.
What changed: the reply answers the decision first, separates pilot readiness from expansion, and proposes a next step without inventing a completion date.
Practice the full review with your team.
In the 90-minute Is This Ready to Send? workshop, participants work from a source packet and several drafts, discuss their review decisions, and revise a deliverable. They leave with an annotated final draft and a short review guide.
Plan this workshop for your teamMake the learning last
Start with a workshop. Build from there.
A focused live session
Choose the workshop closest to the work your team needs to improve. Discuss the audience, experience level, and delivery format with us.
A continuing team program
Combine live workshops with practice between sessions and an optional follow-up clinic or individual coaching.
Courses and AI writing tools
Add on-demand AI skills courses, Prompt Pilot, Diagnostics, and the Prompt Library to support practice after training. Access and term are set out in your proposal.
Included for all Write.law users: The AI-Enabled Lawyer
A practical resource for using AI more effectively across legal tasks, collecting more than a decade of Write.law’s proprietary work with leading legal teams around the world.
Explore The AI-Enabled Lawyer →Your instructor
Legal practice meets the craft of teaching.
Joe Regalia is a law professor, attorney, and co-founder of Write.law. His workshops combine legal writing, practical AI skills, and guided work on realistic assignments.
Joe graduated summa cum laude from the University of Michigan Law School, clerked for the Ninth Circuit, and practiced at AmLaw 100 firms.
View Joe’s background · See clients and partners
Also planning writing training? Explore the full legal writing workshop menu.
Planning your training
We already have AI tools. What would a workshop add?
Practice the decisions your team still needs to make: defining the assignment, checking claims against sources, preserving important qualifications, and deciding whether a draft is ready for its reader. Participants work through realistic assignments with guided exercises and feedback.
Start with reviewing AI-assisted work if drafts need closer scrutiny; directing a legal assignment if the process is inconsistent; or building a team playbook if colleagues need shared examples and review criteria. The focus is applying judgment to the work your tools help produce.
Which workshop should we start with?
Choose Review if the immediate concern is checking drafts before they go out. Choose Direct if lawyers need a repeatable process for an assignment. Choose Build if an intact group needs shared standards. We can help you select the starting point.
Can we combine live training with courses and tools?
Yes. We can scope a program that combines workshops, on-demand courses, AI writing tools, and coaching. The proposal will specify the included resources, access period, and delivery format.
Do participants need an AI subscription or client documents?
The core Is This Ready to Send? review exercise uses supplied, constructed sources and drafts. Participants need a way to annotate or edit text; no AI subscription or client documents are required. For a workflow or playbook session, we agree on any tool access and permitted inputs in advance.
How do you adapt the session to our group?
Tell us the recurring assignments, participants’ experience, group size, and preferred virtual or in-person format. We use that discussion to scope the examples, discussion format, and follow-up. If you want to use your own materials, agree on permissions and handling before sharing them. Include accessibility needs when planning the session.
What about recordings, materials, and CLE credit?
Include those needs in your inquiry. Recording permission, materials rights, and any course or tool access should be specified in the proposal. CLE eligibility must be confirmed for the particular program and jurisdiction.
How much does team training cost?
Request a custom proposal based on your team size, goals, delivery format, timing, and any follow-up support. Tell us those details so we can recommend an appropriate scope.
What if I am learning on my own?
Explore our legal writing and AI courses and individual plans. All Essential, Plus, and Pro subscriptions include Prompt Pilot, Diagnostics, and the Prompt Library, monthly or annually.
Get a proposal for your legal team
Tell us the work your team needs to improve, your approximate group size, and any timing or format preferences. We can recommend one workshop or a sequence, with optional courses, writing tools, or coaching.
Request a training proposalYour proposal will set out the audience, workshop scope, delivery format, fee, and any course or tool access. Have a CLE or recording requirement? Include it so we can confirm the details for your program.
The science behind better legal work.
Explore the science ↗
