SBAND PRESIDENT
SBAND PRESIDENT
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
AND THE PRACTICE OF LAW
DEBRA HOFFARTH SBAND President
“ The times, they are a-changin’.”— Bob Dylan
Artificial Intelligence( AI) is here and changing the practice of law. AI is reshaping how lawyers research, draft documents, communicate, and manage cases. AI is embedded in many of the tools lawyers use every day, including legal research platforms, case management systems, Microsoft Office ®, and internet searches. More significantly, opposing counsel, clients, and judges are using AI. Lawyers can resist, ignore, or learn to use AI wisely. Understanding how AI works is part of competent legal practice.
AI tools are widely available. Platforms such as ChatGPT ®, Claude ®, Gemini ®, and CoPilot ® are used alongside legal research systems such as Westlaw ® and LexisNexis ®, and case management systems like Clio ®. These tools can assist lawyers with daily tasks, but they do not replace a lawyer’ s legal training, professional judgment, issue-spotting skills, or nuanced understanding of the law.
Used carefully, AI will save time. Lawyers can use AI to help draft pleadings, correspondence, and discovery requests; research jury verdicts; generate deposition and trial questions; summarize records and transcripts; analyze voluminous records; conduct preliminary legal research; automate scheduling; and create checklists and workflows. AI can also help with marketing by
4 THE GAVEL drafting social media posts, blogs, or articles. Used properly, AI allows lawyers to spend less time on routine tasks and more time on strategy, analysis, and client advocacy.
But, like any other tool, AI needs to be used wisely. 1 Dr. Ian Malcolm warned in Jurassic Park ®:“ Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’ t stop to think if they should.” Although not as dramatic as cloning dinosaurs, unchecked reliance on AI can lead to real ethical issues.
Lawyers have a duty to provide competent representation, 2 which includes understanding emerging technologies, such as AI. AI is known to“ hallucinate” citations that do not exist. Lawyers must independently verify every case citation, statute, and legal principle generated by AI. This includes confirming that cases exist, remain good law, and actually support the proposition cited. Courts have sanctioned lawyers for filing briefs containing AIgenerated hallucinated cases. 3 The legal research and cite-checking skills we learned in law school remain a critical skill.
Lawyers also have a duty of client confidentiality. 4 While AI can enhance efficiency and research capabilities, it also raises confidentiality concerns. Many publicly available AI tools share, store, or learn from user inputs. Lawyers should never assume that information entered into an AI system is private or protected. Before using any AI platform with client information, lawyers should:( 1) review the platform’ s privacy policy and terms of service;( 2) determine whether data is retained or used for training;( 3) make client information anonymous when possible; and( 4) obtain informed client consent when appropriate. You cannot outsource client confidentiality.
In my own practice, I ' m integrating AI strategically. I use AI to help with correspondence, which I then edit and customize. I have built forms and workflow checklists to increase efficiency. I use AI to generate preliminary discovery requests and questions for deposition and trial- always with careful review. I also use AI for social media posts and professional writing. I am evaluating whether traditional hourly billing remains appropriate or whether alternative fee arrangements might better share the benefits of technological efficiency.
Just as important are the limits I place on AI. I do not enter confidential client information into public AI platforms. I do not file AI-generated legal research without verifying it independently. And I do not allow AI to replace my professional judgment, strategy, or ethical obligations to clients and the court.
The future of AI in law will continue to evolve. Courts may adopt new rules addressing AI-generated filings. Ethical standards will develop. Questions about unauthorized practice of law and evidentiary reliability will arise. At the same time, AI offers tremendous promise for expanding access to justice.
Lawyers have always adapted to new tools, from typewriters to computers to online research. AI is simply the next evolution. SBAND will continue to provide CLEs on AI and other emerging technologies. The American Bar Association ® also has published resources on the topic. The times are changing and, as always, SBAND is here to help North Dakota lawyers navigate the law’ s ever evolving landscape.
1. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., U. S. Sup. Ct. 2023 Year- End Report on the Federal Judiciary, p. 5( 2023)(“ But any use of AI requires caution and humility.”). 2. N. D. R. Prof. Conduct 1.1. 3. Shahid v. Esaam, 918 S. E. 2d 198, 202-03( Ga. App. 2025). 4. N. D. R. Prof. Conduct 1.6.