As an attorney, I have been very hesitant to use AI. There are reported case decisions where attorneys have used AI to write briefs. The attorneys failed to read  the cases  that they were citing in their own briefs, many of which were fictious.  Those attorneys have been disbarred.

I recently watched a case being argued in the appellate court in New York that governs Long Island, Queens, Staten Island and Westchester.  The court quickly informed the appellant that there were seven cases in his brief that they could not find. They accused him of using AI, which he denied. In subsequent papers he admitted to the use of AI and he has been referred to the grievance committee. His opponent, as well, was criticized by the appellate court, for failing to recognize that the cases were fictitious.

I recently received a voluminous set of financial statements from an adversary. I sent copies to my client and told her it would take me over three hours to review. Within minutes she sent me back and outline that “her” AI generated of all the suspicious transactions contained in the documents. I insisted on reviewing them myself. I found the same transactions that AI had found and a few others that I deemed suspicious.

Just this week I was writing a brief and I need one case to support one sentence that I had written. Researching and finding the case was taking up a lot of time. I tentatively asked AI to find me a case. It found me two, one of which had no relevance to my inquiry. The second case was on point with what I needed. After confirming that, by reading the case, I used the case in my brief and finalized the brief.

I am in a quandary. I am still very hesitant to use AI. But, it has been proven effective in my work, perhaps as an additional “tool” in my arsenal. Do you use AI in your work? If so, how?