---
title: "List dispute exposure arising from the use of a generative tool"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/in-house-general-counsel/assess-ai-related-dispute-exposure/united-states"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A40-B8-3-US"
practice_area: "In-House / General Counsel"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["US"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# List dispute exposure arising from the use of a generative tool

> From the filings, contracts, and incidents the lawyer identifies, list the document, the tool named, and the sentence the lawyer says is in issue. Do not predict the outcome of a dispute and do not write a filing.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/in-house-general-counsel/assess-ai-related-dispute-exposure/united-states  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [In-House / General Counsel](https://ailawframework.com/practice/in-house-general-counsel.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the filings, contracts, and incidents the lawyer identifies, list the document, the tool named, and the sentence the lawyer says is in issue. Do not predict the outcome of a dispute and do not write a filing. |
| What the lawyer must review | A paper presented to a federal court is certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b) after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, including that legal contentions are warranted and that factual contentions have evidentiary support or are identified as likely to have it. ABA Formal Opinion 512 (29 July 2024) warns that a generative tool can produce unreliable citations and that the lawyer remains responsible. ABA Model Rule 1.6 limits what information relating to a representation may be put into a tool. The list is a working paper. The lawyer decides whether any dispute exposure exists and what, if anything, is said about it. |
| Written for | United States |
| Applies to | [Assess AI-related dispute exposure](https://ailawframework.com/practice/in-house-general-counsel/assess-ai-related-dispute-exposure.md) |

## Checking plan

- What the AI does: From the filings, contracts, and incidents the lawyer identifies, list the document, the tool named, and the sentence the lawyer says is in issue. Do not predict the outcome of a dispute and do not write a filing.
- Basis: Checked against the linked sources on 22 October 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance.

## Notes

- A row is not a conclusion that a claim exists. The lawyer decides that.
- Do not put the underlying client documents into a public tool in order to build the list.

## Sources

- [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (representations to the court)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11) (checked 2026-10-22)
- [ABA Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (29 July 2024)](https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-512.pdf) (checked 2026-10-22)

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*