How is AI affecting attorneys practicing law?

AI has become more normalized in everyday life and has been affecting jobs significantly; specifically in law, more attorneys have become reliant on AI for their everyday practice. In fact, all of the legal search engines (including Westlaw and Lexus Nexus) all offer a premium subscription with the ability to utilize AI as part of their platform.  

AI has been making it extremely difficult for judges and attorneys to do their job. Since it is becoming more normalized for AI to be used to create almost anything, attorneys and courts need to be careful in authenticating evidence to make sure that it is not being fabricated.

Additionally, some attorneys have been getting into trouble because they have been using AI to draft legal briefs and AI made up cases and citations to cases that do not exist. In New Jersey, a lawyer created fake citations using AI and presented it in court as his own. This is a serious issue — false information in a court of law risks legal decisions based upon false logic that could have serious consequences.

Two attorneys who have been practicing law for over a decade provided more insight into current AI usage and the effects. The first attorney, Michelle Sharoni, is a business litigation managing attorney at a local Los Angeles firm. The second attorney, Gabi Natashi is a family law attorney who practices in New York in a boutique practice. 

Sharoni has witnessed AI being used in the legal profession for purposes of research, document analysis, and review of materials to spot legal issues.  In fact, Sharoni stated that she has seen entire briefs being submitted by colleagues that were a product of AI.  Sharoni has also noticed that her clients are relying heavily on AI in trying to understand their case better and trying to strategize for their case. 

Sharoni says she has personally used AI herself, as well, “I have used AI cautiously to strategize in coming up with ideas to support persuasive arguments in looking up statutes and cases,” Sharoni says.

She continued to elaborate on the benefits of AI in her legal practice. She noted how it could greatly reduce miniscule tasks such as drafting discovery objections, drafting meet and confer letters to opposing counsel, and revising email communications and letters.

Natashi’s use of AI in her family law practice is similar to Sharoni’s use.  She has also used AI to assess the validity of documents filed by opposing counsel and the strength and weaknesses of the arguments posed by them. She noted, “I have slowly learned to use AI to my benefit by allowing AI to analyze certain complex documents and simplify them as well as to assist me in coming up with legal strategies to attack opponent’s legal arguments.”

Speaking to the ethics of AI in the practice of law, Sharoni said,“it could be [dangerous] if attorneys over rely on AI without independently checking citations, and the foundation for their argument.” Sharoni witnessed attorneys get sanctioned by the court for relying on AI without verifying independently the information cited, leading them to cite the cases that don't exist and make unfounded legal arguments. 

On the topic of long term effects of AI, Sharoni noted that it could cause legal practice to become more efficient in many ways, cutting down potentially hours of work, as well as reducing reliance on paralegals and more junior attorneys. However, AI will never replace the human mind nor work ethic when it comes to high level strategy, client relations, oral arguments, and negotiations with opposing counsel. 

When asked if the elimination of AI completely was necessary, Natashi answered no. She recognizes the validity and benefits of becoming more productive and cutting down the hours of work it would take to do basic tasks.

Since AI seems here to stay, Sharoni and Natashi both are trying to use it in the most ethical way possible. In terms of best practices in regard to AI use, Sharoni urges that attorneys should take responsibility and ownership for their work product and never submit or file a work product that has not been independently verified and citations checked.

AI has both positive and negative implications. Professionals agree that it must be used in caution and independent collaboration to ensure that the integrity of the attorney's work product is not compromised.