Document Type
Conference Proceeding
Publication Title
PIABA 32nd Annual Meeting Materials
Publication Date
2023
Abstract
(Excerpt)
The use of AI in our personal and professional lives has entered the public consciousness over the past several months. The legal profession and the securities industry are no exception. This article begins to explore the use of open source generative AI in legal advocacy, and the related ethical implications for securities arbitration practitioners.
Studies have corroborated the impact of AI on the legal profession that many of us have been seeing in practice or hearing and reading about. A Goldman Sachs study predicted that the legal profession will be one of the most likely areas to be impacted by AI, second only to the clerical and administrative sector. Lawyers themselves seem to agree. A LexisNexis survey found that 39% of lawyers responding to the survey believe AI will transform the practice of law significantly. Fifty one percent of lawyers surveyed had either already used it in their work or were planning on doing so. And 84% believe generative AI tools will increase the efficiency of lawyers, paralegals, or law clerks. In addition, as most lawyers are aware, the latest version of ChatGPT (ChatGPT-4) scored near the 90th percentile on the July 2022 Uniform Bar Exam.
Keeping this phenomenon in mind, this article explores the ethical considerations that lawyers should consider regarding the use of AI in legal practice, focusing on advocacy in securities arbitration. The article will spotlight ethical concerns raised in the highly publicized case involving attorney use of ChatGPT in writing a legal brief submitted to the court in the Southern District of New York, consider some initial judicial responses, touch on broad ABA guidance regarding AI, address comparable concerns with ethical AI in the securities industry, and then turn to the application of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The bottom line is that while AI may contribute to efficiency and idea generation, as with all technological tools used by lawyers, the lawyer is ultimately responsible for, and must supervise and vet, all work product generated or assisted by AI.
Included in
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons, Securities Law Commons
Comments
Reprinted with the permission of Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association (PIABA).