Insights from the United States

Featured Librarian: Diana Koppang

Institutional Role and Setting

I am the Director of Research & Competitive Intelligence at Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP in Chicago, Illinois. Neal, Gerber is a law firm with a single office in Chicago, with around 130 attorneys, practicing in a wide range of civil law areas. The firm’s primary practice areas are intellectual property, corporate, estate planning, labor, and litigation. My department reports to Operations. In addition to my role as department head, the team is comprised of the Research Manager, two Research Analysts, and one Technical Services Librarian.

Personal Background and Librarianship Journey

Like many in this field, I discovered librarianship by chance. In college, I struggled to settle on a direction, attending three different schools and trying out about five majors before finally earning my undergraduate degree in Finance—chosen simply because it required the fewest remaining courses. During these studies, which I found uninspiring, I noticed an ad in the student newspaper, The Daily Illini, for a new undergraduate minor in Information Studies offered by the Graduate School of Library and Information Science. Open to students of any major, it caught my attention, and I joined the first cohort.

Looking back, I can see a clear thread running through all the majors I tried: a love of research. As a vocal performance student, I spent hours in the music library searching for forgotten 1940s ballads. In finance, I always volunteered to research companies for our mock investment portfolios. Even in journalism classes, my real interest was researching topics, not writing about them. My journey might have ended with a minor in Information Studies if not for the encouragement of a graduate student teacher who suggested I pursue a master’s degree in Library Science. I was concerned about the cost, but she assured me, “No one pays for library school.” At that time, enrollment was low, and any student who wanted an assistantship could receive one by staffing the university’s vast library system. My assistantship assignment was in the Technical Services Acquisitions Department of the main university library.

After finishing my undergraduate program, I secured a civil service job in the University of Illinois Law Library’s Technical Services Department. I have always been fascinated by the law, drawn to legal dramas and crime novels. I even prepared for the LSAT (law school entrance exam in the US), but five minutes into the test, I realized I didn’t want to practice law, only to work in the field, and walked out of the exam room. Law librarianship, as it turned out, offered the perfect blend of my interests. I consider myself incredibly fortunate to have found this profession so early. I am one of those rare people who genuinely love what they do.

After being accepted into the master of science program in Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, I started my studies in the fall of 2003. Motivated to earn a full-time income and to begin my career quickly, I completed the degree in just one year. In July 2004, I began my post-graduate career as the Information Resources Coordinator at a boutique law firm in Chicago, Pattishall, McAuliffe, Newbury, Hilliard & Geraldson LLP, with about twenty-five attorneys. I was the firm’s first librarian and records manager in its 125-year history, responsible for cataloging the collection from scratch, creating an index for the firm’s records and exhibit rooms, and developing departmental policies.

After eight years in that role, I was ready for new challenges and opportunities to work within a larger team. I joined Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP in 2012 as the Intellectual Property Librarian. Within a couple of years, I was promoted to manage the research team, and in 2015, I became head of the department.

Local Legal System

Law librarians in the US serve in various sectors, including private, academic, and court/government, with differing role expectations and degree requirements. It is common for private law libraries to only require a master’s degree in Library Science, while some academic and court law librarian jobs also require a law degree. As qualified candidates have been increasingly hard to find, some libraries are only requiring bachelor’s degrees, a trend that I personally hope will not continue.

In private law settings, duties often depend on the ratio of librarians to attorneys; for example, my firm has five librarians for 130 attorneys. That is a high ratio for the industry. Our library team is highly regarded at our firm, supporting both attorneys and administrative departments by taking on tasks that would otherwise require more hires in other departments. Many firms lack sufficient library staff to handle complex and in-depth projects. If firms would venture to hire more library staff, I believe they would find the same overall cost savings in hires in other departments and a more valuable resource in the complexity of work that can be performed with a fuller team. At my firm, my team handles the due diligence research work for the Conflicts Department, and we are the research arm of the Marketing Department.

Law firm staff must uphold client confidentiality, prepare client-ready reports, and interact professionally with colleagues, vendors, and other contacts. They are also expected to stay current on the tools they use and actively contribute to the firm’s strategic goals. While the library team may not always have immediate answers, they are encouraged to find solutions by reaching out to other research professionals when needed. So, building a professional network is not only encouraged for individual career development but is also necessary to carry out our professional responsibilities.

Law librarians must avoid the unauthorized practice of law, which is regulated by state statutes. For example, the Illinois Attorney ActFootnote ¹ states, “No person shall be permitted to practice as an attorney or counselor at law within this State without having previously obtained a license for that purpose from the Supreme Court of this State.” Even with a JD or bar license, they generally cannot act as attorneys. Librarians may conduct research if the work product is ultimately supervised by a licensed attorney, and the librarian does not offer legal advice on their own. The main challenge this presents is helping with legal research without interpreting findings or offering what might be considered legal opinions.

Challenges

Questions about the necessity of law librarians seem to resurface with every technological advancement. Yet, I believe that each new development only changes rather than eliminates the need for our expertise. As department head, it is my responsibility to advocate for the evolving value of my department and our changing roles.

The arrival of Generative AI (GenAI) in research platforms has made us even more essential. Now, law librarians are responsible for evaluating whether a GenAI tool is searching the correct data, checking for inaccuracies or “hallucinations,” and training users on how to use these rapidly evolving platforms. As of now, GenAI is particularly strong at streamlining legal workflows, such as building case timelines, drafting deposition outlines, and comparing large sets of legal contracts.

However, the most challenging research tasks, those “needle in a haystack” searches, still require an expert touch. Law librarians remain the go-to professionals for conducting complex searches and verifying the authenticity of results. These skills are especially crucial for investigative assignments involving businesses and individuals. In these roles, we gather information from various databases and open-web sources, sort facts from fiction, and present clear, well-supported narratives of the key findings.

Law libraries, like many administrative departments, often face challenges in securing adequate budgets. Maintaining budget levels is difficult, and finding support to expand services is even harder. The introduction of GenAI tools has further driven up research platform costs, even for products that do not have prominent GenAI features. Law library budgets should be treated like technology budgets, with annual increases that reflect the rising costs seen in IT departments.

Many law firm libraries have already reduced print resources as much as possible. In our firm’s library, the only ongoing print materials are desk books for attorneys, such as court rules, codes, and regulations. Previously, I could compensate for the growing expense of electronic databases by trimming print subscriptions, but that option is no longer available, with nothing left to cut. Now, annual price increases for research databases often exceed the growth rate of billable hour rates, which is a key metric for law firm revenue. This higher price growth rate makes budget management even more challenging.

Vendor consolidation presents both advantages and challenges. On the positive side, having more resources integrated into platforms like Lexis, Westlaw, Bloomberg, or vLex simplifies research for users, as they can access a broad array of materials in one place. However, this consolidation often limits our ability to select only the specific resources we need, making it difficult to lower our contract costs.

As law firm libraries have shifted from a mix of print and electronic resources to mostly digital collections, we have encountered another challenge: print versions of important treatises are increasingly unavailable. Some major vendors have stopped offering certain titles in print altogether or will only sell the print edition if the electronic version is also purchased. This eliminates our previous strategy of saving money by selecting just the print format for certain materials. Additionally, as law firm office spaces have shrunk, there is often simply no room left to store physical books, even when we do have the option to purchase them.

One challenge I do not face at my firm is cost recovery. However, this challenge does still exist for many law firm librarians. This practice involves billing clients for certain overhead expenses, such as charges incurred when using research platforms, typically in addition to the billable hour. Cost recovery made sense in the past when contracts with services like Westlaw and Lexis were transaction-based: each search or document viewed generated a fee that could be directly attributed to client work and billed back accordingly.

However, as law firms shifted to flat-rate contracts for these research tools, many clients began to push back. Their reasoning was simple: if the firm never billed separately for book costs, why should clients now pay for electronic research platform usage? I agree with this, and our firm stopped cost recovery nearly a decade ago. Nonetheless, many large firms continue the practice, which creates ongoing challenges for law librarians.

In these environments, librarians must teach lawyers and researchers to use different databases or search strategies to minimize client charges, all while trying to maximize the amount of costs that can be recovered. This often forces users to prioritize the most cost-efficient resource over the best or most efficient one for the task at hand. The policy is also inconsistently applied: large clients can often negotiate out of these charges, while smaller clients lack that leverage and may end up paying more or receiving less comprehensive research. Librarians are caught in the middle, tasked with balancing firm policies, cost concerns, and the need to provide high-quality research, all within a system that can feel both unfair and unnecessary.

Technology and Innovation

I think back to the beginning of my career over twenty years ago and realize how many tasks I once did manually have now been streamlined with advanced legal technology platforms. For example, I was carrying out litigation analytics research by running counts from searches in PACER of trademark cases and outcomes, then tabulating those in Excel. Now, a couple of buttons in Lex Machina or Docket Navigator will get a result that would have taken me hours. The fifty-state surveys, stored in binders from countless hours of work by summer associates, are now the work of a minute or two in chart-builder tools in the major platforms. These platforms still require skill to use and interpret correctly, but it is much more fun—and faster—to run variations on these reports and analyze the compilation rather than rely on the manual work of years ago.

The development of litigation analytics was a particularly pivotal moment in my career for two reasons. First, it reassured me that advancing technology in the legal research field only creates more opportunities for law librarians rather than presenting an opportunity to replace us with technology. Second, this opportunity gave me the confidence to assert the expertise of law librarians in legal technology.

In 2016, I started analyzing the different platforms and building a spreadsheet that tracked the features and court coverages of the various platforms. Initially, I did this so that I could make a more informed decision about which tool to purchase for our firm. But I soon realized I was creating a unique resource that could be further developed with input from other law librarians who had access to more platforms as this continued to evolve.

I started collaborating with librarians at other firms and academic law libraries, and they would add their findings to the spreadsheet. In early 2019, I recruited around thirty law librarians around the country to collectively test the various litigation analytics platforms on the market, in collaboration with the product developers at each of the platform companies, to conduct a full assessment of this technology area. We then presented the results at the July 2019 annual meeting of the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL). I have continued to update the spreadsheet and periodically send out the updated version to AALL members. It was an exciting collaborative opportunity, and I know that the group made a noticeable difference in how these platforms were developed in the following years with the constructive feedback we provided.

Professional Development

Many US law librarians belong to at least one national association or a local chapter of a major professional organization. These groups offer a range of educational opportunities, some of which are included in membership dues, and others are available for an extra fee. These opportunities are delivered both in-person and online. The main association for law librarians across different sectors (private, academic, and court/government) is AALL.

However, many law librarians rely on their regional chapters for continuing education since chapter memberships are usually much less expensive than joining the national association. Since the pandemic, most programs and networking meetings have shifted to online formats by default, which broadens their reach to members outside major metropolitan areas. Other national organizations popular among US law librarians include the American Library Association (ALA), the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL), the Association of American Law Schools (AALS), the International Association of Law Libraries (IALL), and the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA).

In private law firms, it is common for employers to cover some or all the costs to join a major professional association, but this often depends on the employer’s policies and the librarian’s specific responsibilities.

To keep up with developments in the law librarianship field, I subscribe to the daily KnowItAALL newsletter from AALL. This publication gathers updates from AALL resources, member blogs, and various online news sources. Additionally, I follow “business of law” newsletters offered by legal news platforms like Law360 (by Lexis) and Law.com (by American Lawyer Media or ALM). While these sources primarily focus on the US, they do occasionally include international news.

Legal Research and Resources

A typical project for a law firm librarian can take many forms, but often involves conducting background research on a company, individual, area of technology, or industry. This might be required for an investigation, as part of preparation for a deposition, or to identify and locate a party for legal proceedings. Depending on the purpose, the librarian will choose the most suitable research tools from a range of business information platforms, such as S&P Capital IQ, Pitchbook, Lexis, Bloomberg Law, or Westlaw.

Different platforms provide varying information about the same company, so the librarian must use their good judgment in deciding what to report and how much weight to give specific findings when advising attorneys. Another frequent request is to investigate a party’s litigation history. For federal cases, any of several docket research tools, like Lexis Courtlink, Bloomberg Law, Docket Alarm, Law.com, or Lex Machina, are effective. However, when state court dockets are involved, it is often necessary to search across multiple platforms since each covers different jurisdictions to varying degrees.

When we receive a legal research request, our role is to guide attorneys in developing effective search strategies and directing them to the most appropriate resources rather than interpreting the results for them. In this way, much of our work involves teaching and empowering attorneys to conduct their own research rather than simply providing answers.

The most essential legal research resource for any US law library is a subscription to at least one of the four major legal research platforms—Lexis, Westlaw, Bloomberg Law, or vLex. Without access to one of these, a comprehensive collection of US case law simply is not available to the public. While state statutes and regulatory materials for all fifty states are published on government websites, those sources often lag in updating new legislation and typically offer limited search functionality, especially compared to the major research platforms. These legal databases are also critical for citation analysis, as they allow researchers to see if a case has been overturned by a later decision or statute. Even if someone finds a court opinion using a free resource like Google, they will not be able to view this kind of analysis, which is fundamental to understanding the current status of legal issues.

Cultural Insights

In a private law firm setting, cultural understanding is essential for professionally interacting with others at the firm who have diverse backgrounds. I do not mean to say that this understanding is needed just to behave professionally, but it is essential for developing as a professional and as a compassionate and informed human. Broadening my cultural understanding through working with colleagues of different backgrounds is an opportunity that is not often present in my social network at home. So, I hope I take advantage of these opportunities at the office. My firm has strongly advocated for the importance of DEI and has not backed down on this focus despite the current administration’s threats against law firms for taking that stance. The programming the firm provides attorneys and staff has been eye-opening in terms of understanding the fuller history of my country.

Cultural understanding is also important in investigations and research. In our business or people investigations, we are often asked to draw conclusions about the subjects we are researching. Do they seem “legit,” or well-established, or trustworthy? It is important that we keep an open mind and do not let cultural bias (whether intentional or not) influence our conclusions. Or to point out findings that we provide attorneys that might have bias at play, so that they can avoid relying on unreliable information.

I do wish Americans had a broader understanding of what libraries provide and what librarians do, the vast variety of our roles, and the services we offer. Unfortunately, in the last ten years, libraries have been cast as an institution of liberals, bent on serving just the goals of the left-leaning part of America. When in truth, libraries are a non-partisan bastion of our society. Libraries are a resource for all. But unfortunately, inclusivity is today sometimes seen as exclusive.

Future Outlook

First, the threats. As with all fields requiring advanced degrees, the cuts to higher education funding by the current US administration will likely reduce the number of professionals who enter our field. With that administration’s reluctance to support access to government information, the challenges in finding that information will grow significantly. Already, government agency reports are disappearing from online repositories. Librarians around the country are rallying to preserve information that has already been published, but we fear which data, which stories, and which testimony will no longer make it into reports at all. We are facing a terrifying risk to the future legal history of our nation.

Our professional associations are also facing new challenges in deciding their roles in the national dialogue about the importance of libraries in our democracy and in our communities. The American Library Association has made its stance proudly and blatantly clear: it will do whatever is necessary to protect and advocate for America’s libraries. But other library associations have taken more of a wait-and-see approach or are only looking to actively engage if their member libraries are directly threatened. I think that level of caution is the wrong approach. I think all library associations should recognize the risk to all our libraries when there are attacks on any library. And for those of us in fields whose organizations claim to advocate for the protection of and access to specific types of information, such as legal information, we cannot ignore the implications for all our libraries when local libraries lose funding. In small communities, and especially in lower-economic, rural, or indigenous communities, the libraries are not the sole repositories of reliable information in print—again, including legal information. Those libraries are often the sole sources of reliable internet, which is essential for connecting to information such as laws and regulations, for community members. I do have hope that more library associations will actively fight for the rights and existence of all libraries as these difficult times evolve and present new battlegrounds. I encourage all librarians, not just law librarians, to join in those efforts. This is not the time for timidity. This is the time to decide if you truly value all libraries and decide what you are willing to do in furtherance of that belief.

Second, the exciting challenges. Law librarians are poised to become GenAI experts in vetting the accuracy of information, especially legal information. This is yet another time for growth, but not necessarily reinvention. We need to add new skills to strengthen our ability to continue to excel at our core mission, organizing and finding information in the legal sphere.

I want to see law librarians more openly recognized by the legal industry for the high caliber of work we do daily. Too often, we are overlooked when research technology is discussed in legal news or evaluative studies. When Stanford conducted a comparison of GenAI-enabled legal research platforms in 2024, they did so without any law librarians serving as core members of that team. None of the team’s members were legal research experts, and yet they purported to assess the strength of legal research platforms without the expertise of Stanford’s law librarians, who theoretically could have assisted. And often the research team at Stanford simply used the wrong tool for a task during the study. For example, no one with any real experience in legal research platforms would ever use Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law for a case law question. It would be like running a search on Amazon for a clothing brand made by Target. It was a flawed study and a flawed process because the AI experts and lawyers leading the study did not recognize who the experts in legal research are—law librarians.

Advice and Insights

The best way to start a career as a law librarian is to reach out and talk to current professionals in the field. Speak with several law librarians, those working in different sectors, holding various roles, and coming from diverse backgrounds. Connect with both newcomers to the field and those who have spent many years in it. You can find these contacts through local association chapters or alumni networks from your library science program.

Do not limit yourself if you have only a law degree or only a library science degree. The requirements are changing quickly, and there is always a need for new skills. To succeed as a law librarian, especially in the private sector, you do not need to be a legal expert or have advanced knowledge of legal research platforms right away. What is most important is intellectual curiosity, an interest in the law, and a desire to share that curiosity with others. Skills like legal research and understanding the legal system will develop with experience.

Personal Reflection

While I have had many joyous “Aha!” moments when I have found an elusive piece of information in a research project, my most rewarding times have been seeing the professional growth, both in knowledge and confidence, of members of my team. A strong team rises together, and my success is reflective of my team members’ growth and expertise.

Many of the pro bono projects I have worked on have left a lasting impression. I know that what seemed like small pieces of information that were elusive to the attorneys and parties involved became key in the outcome of a case. I have worked on matters involving reducing sentences of youth offenders, tracking down financial assets of sexual abusers decades after their crimes, and compiling legislative histories of state statutes in furtherance of drafts to amend the state constitution. Law librarians are not going to be noted in the history or reporting of any of these matters, but we know how essential we are. One partner referred to my team as the firm’s secret weapon, but I would be happy for us to be less of a secret.

Finally, many of my best moments have been experiences with the people I have met through AALL and the Chicago Association of Law Libraries (CALL). I encourage all librarians to become active in national associations or local chapters. Those networks become your professional support groups as we all figure out ever-changing tasks and challenges. And they also often become an emotional support group as everyone seeks to balance the strains of work and life. For law firm librarians, our work can sometimes feel uninspiring. We often work for wealthy companies and individuals—and we may not always personally agree with the legal arguments being made on those clients’ behalves. We must be professional and support them the same way we support all clients. But the association’s involvement makes me feel part of something bigger—hopefully, contributing to larger goals for the long-term future of my field.