Why Lawyers Should Not Use AI and Large Language Models (LLMs) Like ChatGPT for General Law Practice
Alexander Mirvis 
More and more law firms move to use ChatGPT to “enhance” their legal practice. The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, raises ethical concerns, particularly when it comes to critical legal work like motions, medical record analysis, demand packages, and more. While these tools may be useful for certain types of tasks, their application in legal practice—particularly for tasks that require specialized knowledge and the protection of client confidentiality—should be approached with caution. Below are several reasons why lawyers should refrain from relying on AI for essential legal work, as doing so constitutes an ethical violation that undermines the duties attorneys owe to their clients.
1. Client Confidentiality and Data Security
The primary concern when using AI in legal practice revolves around the protection of client confidentiality. Lawyers have a duty to keep their clients’ information confidential, and any breach of that duty can have severe consequences, including damage to a client’s case and trust. When lawyers input sensitive data such as medical records, private details of a case, or confidential legal communications into AI systems, they risk disclosing this information to third parties. AI models, including ChatGPT, are trained on vast amounts of publicly available data, and the information inputted into these systems may be stored and used to improve the model.
Even though AI companies may assert that their models do not retain specific user data, it is important to recognize that any data entered into an AI system is vulnerable. If such information is inadvertently stored or accessed by unauthorized entities, it could be exposed in future interactions, putting the client’s case at risk. Lawyers have an ethical obligation to ensure that any information they handle is kept secure, and using AI tools that could potentially disclose private data to third parties constitutes a breach of this responsibility.
2. Competence and Professional Judgment
A lawyer’s duty to provide competent representation is fundamental to their ethical obligations. AI systems, while increasingly sophisticated, cannot replace the expertise and judgment of a qualified legal professional. For tasks like analyzing medical records, determining causality, or drafting complex motions, an AI model like ChatGPT may provide valuable insights. However, these models are not equipped to engage in the nuanced and critical analysis required by experienced professionals. Medical records, for instance, require specialized knowledge to interpret the causality of injuries, understand complex medical terminology, and make accurate determinations about a client’s condition.
When lawyers rely on AI for such tasks, they risk missing important details or misinterpreting data, which could be detrimental to the client’s case. Lawyers are ethically bound to apply their professional expertise to their work, and relying on AI alone could be seen as a failure to meet these standards. While AI can certainly enhance a lawyer’s efficiency, it should never replace the need for a trained professional to perform tasks that require specific expertise.
3. Ethical Violations and Disclosure Risks
One of the most pressing ethical concerns is the potential for disclosure of confidential information. As AI tools like ChatGPT are based on machine learning and continuously improve from the data they process, there is a real risk that the inputted data could be stored and used to train future iterations of the model. This creates an environment where confidential client information may not be fully protected, which can directly conflict with a lawyer’s obligation to maintain client confidentiality.
Even if AI tools are used solely to analyze data or assist with legal research, the lawyer remains ultimately responsible for the accuracy and confidentiality of the information. If sensitive data is put at risk—whether through accidental exposure, security breaches, or the mere possibility of data retention—it can undermine a lawyer’s ethical duties. The public nature of AI systems also makes this issue more pronounced, as it is difficult to guarantee that no unauthorized access will occur.
4. Lack of Full Disclosure to Clients
Lawyers are required to inform their clients about the tools and methods used in their representation. If a lawyer is utilizing AI tools to perform critical aspects of a case, the client must be made aware. Full disclosure is necessary to ensure that clients understand how their information is being handled, especially when AI systems are involved in analyzing or managing their case details. A lack of transparency could not only be seen as a violation of professional ethics, but it could also damage the trust between lawyer and client.
In addition, clients should be informed of the potential risks associated with using AI, such as the possibility of data being stored or misused. They should also be made aware of the limitations of AI systems. For example, while AI can assist with general legal tasks, it cannot replace the need for human expertise when it comes to understanding medical records, crafting motions, or analyzing case law. Lawyers should clarify how AI is being used and ensure that it does not overshadow their professional responsibility to perform due diligence.
5. Limited Use of AI in Law Practice
While AI tools like ChatGPT can be a helpful resource for certain aspects of legal work, their use should be strictly limited to more general tasks such as drafting correspondence, writing demand letters, or conducting preliminary research. These functions do not typically involve the risk of breaching client confidentiality or requiring professional judgment. However, when it comes to more complex legal work—especially that which requires specialized knowledge and training, such as analyzing medical records or drafting motions—AI should not be relied upon as the sole source of analysis or decision-making.
AI can certainly be a valuable tool for enhancing a lawyer’s productivity and providing insights. However, it should be seen as a complement to, not a replacement for, the skills and judgment of a qualified legal professional.
While AI and LLMs like ChatGPT may offer certain advantages in legal practice, lawyers must remain cautious about how they use these technologies. Using AI for tasks that require specialized legal knowledge, such as medical record analysis or drafting complex legal motions, presents significant ethical concerns. The risk to client confidentiality, the failure to meet competence requirements, and the potential for breaches of ethical obligations all highlight the need for lawyers to take a measured approach when incorporating AI into their work. AI should not replace the professional judgment of trained attorneys, but rather should be used as a tool to enhance efficiency for more straightforward tasks. Lawyers must always prioritize their ethical obligations and ensure that their clients’ interests are protected above all else.
