Assess an AI-generated submission in an association dispute
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- Mark statements in the generated submission that the papers do not support, and list citations in the submission for the lawyer to open. Write no replacement submission.
- What the lawyer must review
- You decide whether any of it can be used, and you write anything that is filed or sent. Formal Opinion 512: uncritical reliance on generated text can fail Model Rule 1.1. A citation in the draft is not a source until you have opened it. Model Rule 1.6: do not put the dispute file back into a public tool to do the check. If the property is in California, the association-records rules in Civil Code § 5200 do not decide the merits of the dispute.
- Written for / version
- United States versionUS
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Consider narrowly defined preparation support after confirming 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
- Open each relied-on authority independently. Confirm its existence, current status, proposition and any quotation or pinpoint reference.
- Check the current court or regulator requirements, prescribed form and attachments for the intended document and filing.
- 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.