Every lawyer has heard the story of the filing with invented case citations. It is the right story to remember, and the wrong reason to avoid AI entirely. The risk sits in a few specific uses. Most of the time savings sit elsewhere.
This is a practical view of ChatGPT for lawyers: what it does well, where it must not go, and prompts built around both. It is not legal or regulatory advice; check your firm's policy and your professional body's guidance first.
Where it must not go
- Citations and authorities you have not checked. Language models can produce convincing case names that do not exist. Every citation gets verified in a proper legal database, every time.
- Client-confidential material in unapproved tools. Consumer accounts and enterprise accounts can have very different data terms. Use only what your firm has approved.
- Final advice. It drafts; you advise. Nothing goes to a client without your review.
Where it saves real time
| Task | Why it works |
|---|---|
| First drafts of letters and emails | Structure and tone, which you then correct |
| Summarising long documents you supply | It works from the text you give, not memory |
| Plain-English explanations for clients | Rewriting is a strength |
| Issue-spotting checklists | Good at "what have I missed?" prompts |
| Comparing two versions of a clause | Fast, and easy for you to check |
The pattern: it is reliable when working on text you provide, and unreliable when asked to recall law.
Prompts for lawyers
1. Summarise the attached document in one page: parties, key
obligations, dates, termination rights, and anything unusual.
Quote clause numbers. If something is ambiguous, flag it
rather than interpreting it.
2. Compare these two versions of the clause and list every
change in meaning, not just wording: [v1] [v2].
3. Rewrite this advice for a client with no legal background.
Keep every qualification. Under 300 words: [text].
4. I am reviewing a [type of agreement] for the [buyer/seller].
List the twenty issues I should check. Do not cite any case
law.
5. Draft a letter to [counterparty] setting out [position].
Firm, professional, no threats I have not approved. Mark
anywhere you need a fact from me with [CONFIRM].
6. Turn my rough notes from this client call into a file note:
date, attendees, instructions received, advice given, next
steps: [notes].Notice that none of these ask it to find law. They ask it to work on material you supply.
Set it up once
I am a [practice area] lawyer in [jurisdiction]. Use UK/US
spelling. Never cite cases, statutes or regulations unless I
have provided them in this conversation. When unsure, say so.
Flag ambiguity rather than resolving it.Put that in custom instructions or a project so it applies to every chat.
Questions people ask
Is it safe for lawyers to use ChatGPT?
With approved enterprise tools, confidential data kept out of anything unapproved, and every output reviewed, many firms now allow it. Your firm's policy and regulator's guidance come first.
Can ChatGPT do legal research?
It can help frame questions and suggest issues, but it must not be your source for authorities. Use a legal database for that.
Is there a better AI for lawyers?
Specialist legal tools connected to verified databases are better for research. General assistants remain useful for drafting and summarising.
Where to take this next
For firm-wide rules on what staff may put into AI tools, see AI acceptable use policy examples. For an assistant set up around your own practice, The Pack writes the instructions and task files for you.
Laisser un commentaire :