AI for lawyers.
You've seen the headlines — including the one about lawyers sanctioned for citing cases an AI made up — and it's left a fair amount of suspicion. Good. That suspicion is exactly the right instinct. Used carelessly, AI is a liability; used well, with verification, it's a genuinely useful drafting and explaining assistant.
The line is simple: AI helps with the writing and the first pass of thinking, never the legal authority. It does not do research you can rely on without checking, and it never touches privileged information on a personal account. Inside those rules, it saves real hours.
no card, no account — read it free
6 ways lawyers are actually using AI
Clear, professional emails and intake replies you finalize.
Draft a professional, reassuring email to a client explaining that their matter will take longer than expected, why, and what the next step is. I'll fill in the specifics.
Translate the legalese into something they actually understand.
Explain what an indemnification clause does in plain English for a non-lawyer business client, with a simple everyday analogy.
Get the gist fast — then verify against the source.
Summarize the key obligations and deadlines in this contract section for a quick read: [paste]. Flag anything ambiguous I should review against the full text myself.
A starting list to react to, not a substitute for your analysis.
I'm thinking through a breach-of-contract dispute. List possible arguments and counterarguments at a high level so I can pressure-test my own analysis. General only — I'll do the real research.
A structured starting point you edit to fit.
Draft a plain-language outline for a simple mutual NDA between two small businesses. I'll review and adapt every section to the actual deal.
Get the skeleton down so you can focus on the substance.
Give me a clear structure for an internal memo analyzing a legal question, with the standard sections and what each should cover. I'll supply the law and analysis.
This is the one that matters: never rely on AI for case citations or legal authority — it invents realistic-looking cases that don't exist, and you are accountable for every cite. Pull and read the real source. Never put privileged or client-identifying information into a personal AI account, and follow your bar's and firm's rules on AI use.
You’re not behind.
You're not behind — your skepticism is the skill. The lawyers in trouble trusted it as an authority; the ones getting value treat it as a fast first-drafter and verify everything. Keep your judgment in front of it and it's a force multiplier, not a risk.
Questions lawyers ask
- Will AI replace lawyers?
- No. It accelerates drafting and explaining, but legal judgment, strategy, advocacy, and accountability to the client are yours. It changes which parts of the work are slow — it doesn't carry the responsibility that defines the job.
- Can I trust AI for legal research or citations?
- No — this is the dangerous one. General models confidently generate cases, quotes, and citations that look real and don't exist. Use AI to draft and explain, but every legal authority must be pulled and verified in a real source before you rely on or cite it.
- Can I paste client documents into ChatGPT?
- Not into a personal account — treat it as non-confidential and outside privilege. Strip identifiers and use the generic version of the task, and only use tools your firm has vetted and your ethics rules permit for anything involving real client matters.