AI for Legal Teams¶
In one line: Use AI to speed up first drafts, contract comparison, summarising and research triage, but treat every output as an unverified junior draft: you must check citations and facts yourself, protect client confidentiality, and follow your bar's rules. Last reviewed: 2026-11-07
The short version¶
- Good uses: summarising long documents, comparing a contract to your standard playbook, drafting routine clauses and plain-language explanations, organising discovery material, preparing deposition outlines.
- Never file or send anything citing a case, statute or quote you have not opened yourself. Models can produce convincing citations that do not exist. See hallucinations.
- Confidentiality comes first. Do not paste client or privileged material into a tool unless you know where the data goes, who can see it, and whether it is kept or used for training.
- Professional-conduct rules apply to lawyers who use these tools (competence, confidentiality, supervision, candour to the court). Read your own jurisdiction's bar guidance. The American Bar Association issued Formal Opinion 512 on generative AI on July 29, 2024; it applies existing Model Rules (competence, confidentiality, supervision, candour to the tribunal) and is not binding. Read it directly.
- This is a judgment guide for working with AI, not legal advice.
Where it fits¶
| Task | AI helps with | You still own |
|---|---|---|
| Contract review | Flagging deviations from a playbook, summarising obligations | Risk calls, negotiation |
| Drafting | First drafts of routine clauses, letters, policies | Final wording and accuracy |
| Research | Finding leads and explaining a doctrine in plain English | Reading the primary source |
| Discovery | Grouping and summarising documents | Privilege calls, defensible process |
| Compliance | Mapping a regulation to controls as a checklist | Interpreting what applies to you |
| Client communication | Plain-language summaries | What is promised and advised |
Copyable prompts¶
Contract against a playbook (use an approved, confidential-safe tool)
Here is our standard position on [clause types]: [paste playbook].
Here is the counterparty's contract: [paste].
For each clause in the playbook, quote the matching text, say whether it
matches, deviates or is missing, and rate the deviation low/medium/high
with one sentence why. Do not give advice beyond what is in the text.
Research triage
Explain the general legal question below in plain English and list the
kinds of authority I should look for. Do NOT cite specific cases or
statutes; I will find those in a legal database. Question: [question]
A verification routine¶
- Open every cited source in a legal database and confirm it says what the draft claims.
- Check the quoted text word for word.
- Confirm the authority is still good law.
- Record which parts were AI-assisted, per your firm or department policy.
Common mistakes¶
- Trusting a citation because it looks formatted correctly.
- Using a free consumer tool with client facts.
- Not telling a supervising attorney or client when the policy or engagement terms require it.
- Letting a tool "summarise" a contract and relying on the summary without reading the risky clauses.
Next steps¶
Sources¶
- ABA news, first ethics guidance on a lawyer's use of AI tools (Formal Opinion 512): https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2024/07/aba-issues-first-ethics-guidance-ai-tools/ (checked 2026-11-07 via search summary; the opinion page itself returned HTTP 403 earlier)