The Beatles handed Ringo their gentlest anthem on Sgt. Pepper, and its whole philosophy fits on a bumper sticker: none of us manages entirely alone, and the smart move when you are out of your depth is to lean on the right people. The song opens by asking, in effect, what you would do if you hit a note you could not reach on your own — and answers that you would call in help and get by just fine.
Last week’s post showed how Arizona now requires its judges to understand the benefits and risks of artificial intelligence. But a rule does not arrive with a syllabus — in a recent survey, nearly half the judges using these tools said no one had trained them. A competence duty that lands without institutional teaching behind it gets discharged through the record, which is to say it gets discharged by counsel. In a case that turns on how a model was built, what data trained it, or whether an output can be trusted, the party that credibly teaches the court the technology has enormous influence over how the court rules on it. That job belongs to the expert you retain and, sometimes, to the co-counsel you bring in.
Which raises a question that is unfashionable for a law firm to take up, though taking it up is the mark of a good one: no single firm holds all the expertise these cases can require. This post is about knowing when you need help, and about what a client should ask before their firm brings someone in.
What would you do if I sang out of tune?
More and more commercial disputes now have an AI question buried in them somewhere. A contract turns on whether a vendor's “AI-powered” product did what was promised. A trade-secrets fight hinges on what data trained a competitor's model. A key document, image, or recording is challenged as machine-fabricated. Each of those questions eventually needs someone who can speak to the technology with real authority — not a generalist gesturing at it, but an expert who can explain how the system works and why its output should or should not be believed.
The temptation, for a firm that wants to look complete, is to wave the question off as something it can handle in-house. That instinct is where cases are quietly lost. The better instinct is the one the song recommends: recognize the note you cannot hit, and call in someone who can.
Lend me your ears
Bringing in an expert is not the same as bringing in the right one, and in AI cases the difference is stark. Machine-generated analysis faces the same reliability gatekeeping as any expert testimony — the court will ask whether the method is sound, whether it rests on sufficient data, and whether it was reliably applied to the facts. The proposed federal rule aimed at machine-generated evidence, which we discussed in an earlier post, would apply that same expert-reliability standard to AI output offered without a human witness. The practical problem is that many AI systems are black boxes whose reasoning is opaque even to their own developers, which raises the threshold question a court cannot avoid: how do you establish the reliability of a process no one can fully explain?
That is why the choice of expert matters so much. Courts expect an expert to explain each opinion in their own reasoning rather than pointing at an automated conclusion and calling it authority. An impressive resume is not enough; the expert has to be someone who can open the box, or credibly explain why what is inside can be trusted, and hold up when the other side attacks it — in front of a judge who may be meeting this technology for the first time. Choosing that person is itself a specialized judgment — one worth making deliberately, not at the last minute.
Do you need anybody?
When a firm proposes bringing in co-counsel or an expert, a client is entitled to a clear conversation, not just a new line on the invoice. A few questions cut to the heart of it. Is this help genuinely necessary, or is it padding? What specifically will this person do that the firm cannot? Who stays in charge of strategy — does the case still have one captain, or is it now run by committee? Have conflicts been checked? And how is the cost structured, so that “bringing in help” does not quietly become “billing the same work twice”? A firm that welcomes those questions is one that brought in help for the client's benefit. A firm that bristles at them may have brought it in for its own.
We get by with a little help from our friends
The quiet confidence of that old song is that leaning on others is not a confession of weakness — it is how anyone actually gets through anything. The same is true in litigation. The firm that knows the limits of its own expertise, and assembles the right team around a case, serves a client far better than the one that pretends to be everything and quietly gets the technology wrong. In an era when so many disputes carry an AI question at their core, knowing which friends to call has become part of the job. The best lawyers have always understood that they get by, and their clients win, with a little help from the right people.
This post is part of an ongoing series on how AI is reshaping litigation and law-firm practice. Earlier installments are collected on the LegaleAZ blog.
A Word About Silver Cain
Silver Cain PLC represents businesses in complex commercial and real estate litigation in Arizona and beyond. When Rebecca Cain and I founded the firm, we built it around direct partner involvement, senior trial-level judgment, and a willingness to bring in the right outside help when a matter calls for it rather than pretending we are everything to everyone. If the questions in this post are relevant to your business, or to the firms you retain, we are glad to have that conversation.Leon Silver is an AV-rated trial lawyer at Silver Cain PLC, focused on commercial and real property disputes since 1989. Reach him at lsilver@silvercain.com.Silver Cain, PLC is an Arizona based boutique law firm with recognized excellence in commercial and real estate related disputes.
The firm represents businesses, investors, and professionals in sophisticated legal matters throughout the United States, providing nuanced strategies and high-caliber advocacy in both state and federal courts, arbitrations and mediations. Our attorneys work closely with business owners, investors, and individuals to protect their interests and find the best path forward, making Silver Cain, PLC a trusted resource for clients and fellow professionals alike.
