In response to the evolving landscape of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in legal practices, and particularly in light of the Proposed Advisory Opinion 24-1 by the Florida Bar, with other Bars surely to follow suit, it is imperative for lawyers to understand and address the ethical and legal implications of using AI powered legal technologies in their practices.

In this article, we explore the ethical and legal challenges associated with the adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in the practice of law and provide practical tips for implementing AI in a way that aligns with these ethical standards while allowing lawyers to harness the benefits of legal AI tools.

Confidentiality and Client Information

ABA Model Rule 1.6 emphasizes the importance of maintaining the confidentiality of client information. Lawyers must protect all information related to client representation and obtain informed consent for any disclosure, especially when using AI tools.

Implementation Tips: Lawyers should use AI platforms with robust encryption and obtain explicit client consent for using legal AI tools. Regular audits for AI tools' compliance with confidentiality standards are recommended. It’s also important to note that while using tools like ChatGPT can offer a myriad of benefits for law firms, entering client confidential information on such a tool is highly discouraged. Specialized tools like DraftyAI, for example, offer more protections to lawyers because we employ additional encryption and backend protection methods, ensuring that your client’s information is kept confidential.

However, adding an AI usage clause to your standard client representation agreement, for example, is still recommended for clear disclosure of AI usage to clients.

Oversight and Responsibility

Under ABA Model Rule 5.3, lawyers are responsible for non-lawyer assistants' actions, including AI tools. This includes ensuring that AI-generated work complies with ethical and legal standards.

Implementation Tips: Establishing regular reviews for AI-generated work, training staff on appropriate legal AI use, and clearly communicating with clients about AI's role in their cases is an essential step in complying with ABA Rule 5.3. Remember, AI generated work is considered your own once submitted to a legal authority. It’s essential that you thoroughly review all AI generated work for accuracy and relevance.

Legal Fees and Billing Practices

ABA Model Rule 1.5 prohibits lawyers from charging excessive fees. When using legal AI tools, lawyers must ensure that the fees for AI-related services are reasonable and justified.

Implementation Tips: It is ethically permissible for a lawyer to charge a client solely for the genuine expenses incurred specifically for that client's case. While generative AI programs can enhance a lawyer's efficiency, this should not lead to artificially inflated time claims. Instead, lawyers might explore options like contingent fee agreements or set rates for certain services, ensuring both the lawyer and client benefit from the improved efficiency.

It is important to avoid charging for costs that have already been included in the lawyer’s general overhead. It is key to adopt transparent billing practices for AI-related costs and ensuring these charges are reasonable. A lawyer should document AI's efficiency improvements to justify costs and demonstrate value to clients.

Advertising and Representation

According to ABA Model Rule 7.1, lawyers must avoid misleading or deceptive advertising. This includes accurately representing AI capabilities and providing clear disclaimers in AI interfaces, such as chatbots.

Implementation Tips:

Lawyers must exercise caution when employing generative AI chatbots for advertising and client intake, as they bear responsibility for any misleading information or inappropriate communication these chatbots might convey. It's important to clearly indicate to prospective clients that they are interacting with an AI, not a human representative of the law firm. Additionally, lawyers should implement screening queries on their websites to appropriately direct communications, especially for individuals already represented by another lawyer.

In advertising their use of generative AI, lawyers may not claim superiority over other lawyers' AI systems unless they can objectively verify such claims.

In summary, while AI in legal practices presents significant opportunities for efficiency and automation of routine tasks, lawyers must be vigilant in ensuring compliance with ethical standards. This includes responsibilities around confidentiality, oversight, billing practices, and advertising. As AI technology evolves, staying informed and adapting to these changes will be crucial for ethical and effective legal practice.