Document Type
Symposia Article
Abstract
This article focuses on the second step in the due diligence process. While it addresses the question of competency, it focuses more on the further steps a lawyer must take to ensure that the use of the service as part of the representation of a client is consistent with the lawyer’s other ethical obligations. While it is important to emphasize that competency requires that the lawyer must be able to assess whether the work product is comparable to what a human would produce, competency is of course a fact-depending inquiry: whether a will is competently drafted turns on the standard of care of a practitioner who drafts wills.
This article focuses more on how a lawyer can determine whether it is ethical to use a competent service that augments document drafting. While addressing how ethical concerns arise across typical practice areas, it highlights a practice area where the risks for violations may be particularly acute because the need for confidentiality is high, and the potential for undetected conflicts of interest is great: patent practice. This article identifies the issues, describes the potential risks, and explains what protections a lawyer should look for in the terms of service of an automated legal document drafting site to ensure ethical representation.
DOI
10.37419/JPL.V4.I5.3
First Page
465
Last Page
484
Recommended Citation
David Hricik, Asya-Lorrene S. Morgan & Kyle H. Williams,
Ethics of Using Artificial Intelligence to Augment Drafting Legal Documents,
4
Tex. A&M J. Prop. L.
465
(2018).
Available at:
https://doi.org/10.37419/JPL.V4.I5.3