Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • TRADE SECRETS—N.C.: North Carolina Supreme Court reinstates insurance agency’s trade secrets case
    • COPYRIGHT—C.D. Cal.: Disney’s contributory infringement claim against AI company Hailuo survives a Cox v. Sony challenge
    • COPYRIGHT—S.D.N.Y.: AI music website wins partial dismissal of copyright suit
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—Attention to ethical considerations needed for responsible AI use by law firms
    • PATENT—Fed. Cir.: PTAB’s obviousness ruling for shared browsing patent claims affirmed
    • TRADEMARK—E.D.N.Y.: Mark for iconic 1980s Members Only jacket resurfaces in litigation
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    IP Law Daily, EXPERT INSIGHTS—Attention to ethical considerations needed for responsible AI use by law firms, (May 27, 2026)

    Law Firms Mentioned:Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

    By WK Editorial Staff

    Article by Hunton attorneys examines the growing use of generative AI in legal practice, highlighting both its benefits and associated risks.

    AI tools are increasingly being used by law firms to improve efficiency in such tasks as legal research, draf ...

    By WK Editorial Staff

    Article by Hunton attorneys examines the growing use of generative AI in legal practice, highlighting both its benefits and associated risks.

    AI tools are increasingly being used by law firms to improve efficiency in such tasks as legal research, drafting, document review, note-taking, and performance tracking. However, the use of AI raises concerns with respect to client confidentiality risks; attorney-client privilege, work product, and waiver issues; and the accuracy of AI tools’ output. Ethical obligations under professional conduct rules require lawyers to safeguard client information, potentially obtain informed client consent, and carefully vet AI tools’ security and data policies.

    In an Expert Insights article, Christopher J. Dufek, Partner, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, and Aubrianna L. Mierow, Associate, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, explain that, while AI offers significant advantages, its responsible use demands careful oversight, compliance with ethical obligations, and continuous adaptation to evolving legal standards.

    The authors point out that recent court decisions suggest communications with public AI tools may not be privileged, while protection for work product depends on factors such as attorney involvement and litigation context. They also address the problem of inaccurate AI-generated outputs, or “hallucinations,” such as fabricated legal citations. The authors note that courts have disciplined attorneys for relying on such errors, emphasizing that counsel must independently verify all AI-generated content.

    According to the authors, firms wishing to prevent false or inaccurate information from AI being filed in court should implement training programs, establish clear AI usage policies, ensure transparency among attorneys about AI use, and treat AI outputs as preliminary drafts requiring thorough review.

    The Expert Insights article, titled “AI Tools in Legal Practice and Associated Risks and Mitigation Strategies,” is available here.

    Attorneys: Christopher J. Dufek and Aubrianna L. Mierow (Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP).

    MainStory: AINews IndustryNewsTrends TechnologyInternet

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use