Set the limits before a tool reads a purchase contract
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- From the provider's terms and the firm's written policy, list what the tool retains, whether it trains on inputs, and who else can see them. Do not review the contract.
- What the lawyer must review
- You decide whether the tool may be used on the matter. Formal Opinion 512 requires informed consent before information relating to the representation goes into a self-learning tool whose output could disclose it. Model Rule 1.6 is the confidentiality duty. Rule 5.3 requires measures so that nonlawyer assistance, including a tool, is compatible with the lawyer's duties. Florida Opinion 24-1, which is advisory, tells the lawyer to research retention, sharing, and self-learning first. The check is against the terms that will actually apply.
- Written for / version
- United States versionUS
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Potential support includes identifying points for review. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- Review operative clauses in the complete document, including definitions, cross-references, schedules and inconsistencies with the instructions.
- Confirm that the actual tool, feature and processing terms permit use of this information, including access, retention, training and disclosure conditions.
- Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
- Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.