Legal Counsel's AI Use & Confidentiality
Employers can ask how technology is used in their legal matters without assuming that every task should be automated. The useful questions concern judgment, confidentiality, verification, and accountability.
Questions and Answers
Does competent legal representation require using generative AI?
Not for every task. Texas Ethics Opinion 705 explains that the decision to use generative AI requires an understanding of its benefits and risks; it does not establish a general requirement to use it for a particular purpose.
An employer can ask counsel why a tool is appropriate for the work and how the result will be checked. Neither using AI nor declining to use it, by itself, establishes the quality or efficiency of the representation.
What should a client ask before confidential information enters an AI tool?
Ask what information would be entered, why it is needed, who could access it, and what the applicable product terms permit. Retention, training, human review, subcontractors, and security settings can vary between products and account types.
Counsel should assess confidentiality duties and any necessary client communication or consent before use. An enterprise subscription or a security label is not a substitute for reviewing the relevant terms and configuration.
Sources: Texas Professional Ethics Committee: Opinion 705; American Bar Association: Guidance on Lawyers’ Use of AI.
Can AI use put attorney-client privilege at risk?
Yes, depending on the facts. Privilege is not automatically preserved or lost merely because AI was involved. The purpose of the communication, access by third parties, confidentiality arrangements, and governing law all matter.
Ask counsel to evaluate the proposed workflow before sensitive communications are uploaded. Keep access limited and do not assume that forwarding an ordinary business document to a lawyer, or adding a privilege label, makes it privileged.
Sources: Texas Professional Ethics Committee: Opinion 705; American Bar Association: Guidance on Lawyers’ Use of AI.
How should AI-assisted legal research and drafting be checked?
Important citations, quotations, dates, and legal propositions should be checked against the underlying authorities. Review also needs to address jurisdiction, subsequent developments, and whether the cited rule actually applies to the facts.
A plausible citation is not proof that a case exists or supports a statement. Ask who performs the review and how the firm handles applicable court requirements for AI use. The appropriate process depends on the task and the consequences of an error.
Sources: American Bar Association: Guidance on Lawyers’ Use of AI.
Who is accountable for AI-assisted legal work?
Using software does not transfer a lawyer’s professional responsibilities to the software vendor. Competence, confidentiality, candor, and appropriate supervision continue to matter when technology assists the work.
An employer can ask which lawyer is responsible for the matter and what review occurs before advice or a filing is finalized. Responsibility for a particular error or supervisory failure depends on the applicable rules and facts, not an assumption that every partner is automatically liable.
Should AI use change a client's legal bill?
Discuss fees and technology-related charges under the engagement agreement. For hourly work, time saved by a tool should not be billed as though the lawyer actually spent those hours. Flat-fee arrangements and agreed expenses require their own analysis.
AI may reduce time for some tasks while creating additional review work for others. Ask how the proposed workflow affects the scope and pricing rather than expecting a fixed discount or assuming that technology always makes a matter less expensive.
Sources: American Bar Association: Guidance on Lawyers’ Use of AI.
What questions help an employer evaluate a law firm's AI practices?
Ask which tasks use AI, which tasks do not, how confidential information is protected, and how a lawyer verifies significant output. Discuss any relevant court rules, client restrictions, incident procedures, and the effect on fees.
The goal is to understand the process for your matter, not to obtain a list of fashionable tools. Request clear answers about who is responsible and how concerns are escalated. These are questions for the engagement discussion, not a substitute for reviewing the agreement.
Updated October 21, 2026. General information for employers, not legal advice. Requirements depend on the facts, the employer, and the locations involved. Reading these FAQs does not create an attorney-client relationship.