The rapid pace of AI innovation is reshaping industries, including the legal field, leaving many wondering where to focus next. Following the recent resolution of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman’s controversy, what lies ahead for AI in law? ChatGPT might seem like a good place to ask, but keep in mind its knowledge cutoff is January 2022—hardly helpful for recent developments. Lawyers seeking up-to-date case law might need to turn back to traditional tools like Shepardizing.
AI vs. Legal Practice: New Dynamics and Ethical Challenges
Legal professionals are beginning to face AI’s growing presence, not just as a tool but as a competitor. For example, the Illinois law firm that sued DoNotPay—a robot-run legal service—on claims of false advertising and association under the Lanham Act lost the case. DoNotPay, wisely, hired human lawyers, who secured a dismissal. The situation underscores a new reality: AI is no longer just an assistant but also a potential rival.
The Risks of Over-Reliance on AI
“Social loafing,” a phenomenon where individuals rely on others in a group to carry the workload, now extends to human-AI collaboration. Studies show that people working alongside robots tend to pay less attention to details compared to working solo. For lawyers, this complacency could lead to costly errors. Cases already exist where reliance on AI for legal briefs resulted in sanctions, including fabricated citations.
The lesson? AI can assist but shouldn’t replace human diligence. Lawyers must remember their ethical obligation under the Rules of Professional Conduct to take full responsibility for their work—regardless of AI involvement. Passing blame to a machine won’t sit well with judges, as seen in the infamous ChatGPT case fabrication debacle. Perhaps a simple mantra suffices: “Trust, but verify.”
Ethics, Billing, and Confidentiality Concerns
State bars are addressing AI’s implications for legal ethics. The Florida Bar is leading the way, advising lawyers to disclose AI usage to clients, particularly when billing for its use. Additionally, attorneys must rigorously review AI-generated work and uphold client confidentiality. Oversight extends to advertising, fee structures, and broader professional responsibilities.
California, too, is engaging with the conversation. Its report on Generative AI (GenAI) explores the opportunities and risks AI poses in the public sector. Unlike traditional AI systems, GenAI creates original content across various mediums, offering flexibility but also ethical and practical challenges.
Certifying AI Usage in Court
The Fifth Circuit may become the first court to require attorneys to certify their AI usage in filings, introducing potential Rule 11 sanctions for misuse. While it hasn’t reached a “use AI, go to jail” scenario, the risks of relying on unverified AI output are real. Lawyers must ensure every pleading they sign is accurate and authentic, whether drafted by human hands or enhanced with AI tools.
As AI continues to integrate into legal practice, its role will evolve, presenting both opportunities and challenges. Legal professionals must adapt, ensuring technology enhances their work without compromising ethics, diligence, or the trust of their clients.
