AI Use Cases
AI this. AI that. There seem to be two camps: all in vs. never.
I believe deeply in healthy skepticism.
And yet, there’s something odd, unnerving about some of the “never” crowd.
There is an undercurrent of being lesser than if you use AI, an assumption that you’ll misuse it, a belief that the output will never compare.
I want to push back on that.
Before technology, there was good, better, best lawyering. AI won’t change that.
It is possible to adopt AI ethically and while keeping your wits about you and your practice.
And, some of our clients expect both: use of the tools to save costs and a high level of lawyering simultaneously.
If you’re nervous about it, good. That means you care and are less likely to misuse it.
When clients allow AI use, I use it these ways (and more):
> matching tone — I still ghost write emails. I will draft the email, find a prior email from the ultimate sender, and ask AI to rewrite it, matching the sender’s tone (not editing the substance or evaluating the law, if applicable).
> be opposing counsel — I prep the tool with the relevant information; maybe it’s all the briefs on a motion or deficiency letters in a discovery dispute. I give it opposing counsel’s credentials and ask it to be them. Then, we walk through my strongest arguments, their strongest positions, and volley back and forth to prep for the meet and confer or oral argument.
> early brief development — I don’t give AI free reign. I tell it what I want to argue and why. I tell it to NOT provide legal citations. This is helpful when you are on a short deadline and/or your team is otherwise occupied. It’s a get-started, not finished product. It’s what you’d expect from a summer associate, meaning: you run with it from there, applying normal judgment, analysis, and research.
> local rules application — I feed a draft brief to AI, along with the local rules or judicial preferences, and ask AI to confirm compliance (providing citations to the rules along the way). As always, you trust but verify. But it is helpful to have a tool that can keep this context in mind.
> drafting discovery requests — here, again, I don’t give AI free reign. I prepare the initial requests or give AI a list of what I plan to seek and then probidw the relevant background docs. I ask it: what am I missing? I might ask it to help me prioritize the requests, holding some back for a second set.
> and the basics — document review, deposition summaries and comparison, exhibit organization, calendar review, and reviewing time entries for compliance with client billing guidelines.
All of this is done in secure systems that protect privilege and confidentiality
A human remains in the loop at every step.
Never abandoning your judgement and expertise? Critical.
♥️✌🏻🔥