Letter · Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools

Client consent to input information into a generative AI tool (United States)

A tool-specific consent for putting information relating to a representation into a named generative AI tool, with the risk particulars Formal Opinion 512 says a boilerplate engagement sentence does not supply.

Kind: Letter. A letter or email you adapt and send.
Where it applies: United States
AI use: Yellow You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
Law stated as at: 22 October 2026
Status: Maintained. Checked on 22 October 2026 against the 6 authorities it cites, for United States.
Version: 1
Source: Written for this library

When to use it

Use when a US lawyer proposes to input information relating to a representation into a named generative AI tool. Do not use it for a tool that will not receive that information, and do not use a blank or generic version.

Used for these tasks

Each task page says how far AI may help with the task and what the lawyer must review.

How AI may be used

A tool may copy, into the schedule, facts that already appear in the terms or approval record the lawyer attaches. The lawyer writes the risk explanation and decides whether the consent, once given, is informed.

AI may

Copy the provider's stated training, retention and access terms from the contract or privacy terms the lawyer has attached, with the clause reference
List schedule rows that are still blank or that still say "see terms" without a fact
Prepare a side-by-side of the categories the lawyer proposes to input and the categories the client has agreed

AI must not

Must not describe the tool's data practices from a marketing page or from the tool's own output
Must not tell the client the risk is low, or that consent has been given
Must not add a category of information the lawyer did not write into the schedule
Must not send the consent to the client

The lawyer checks

The schedule names one tool and states why it is used, what is input, the risk, who may later have access, the benefit, and a real alternative
The description of training and retention matches the terms the lawyer read, and those terms are in the file
Former-client and prospective-client information is not input on the back of this consent unless the schedule says so and the person who must consent has consented
The client can decline without this letter treating decline as a breach

Method: how the Green, Yellow and Red levels are decided. This is guidance for planning, not legal advice.

Authorities

Read the full text

The full text is available after you log in. It is free. When you log in you can:

read the whole precedent, with its drafting notes beside it;
copy it, or download it as a Word file or Markdown;
add it to your firm’s knowledge base, so colleagues can find it;
let the AI tools you connect read it from that knowledge base.

The summary, the law it rests on and the AI-use guidance above stay public. Privacy.

More in Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools

All precedents for Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools · Tasks and AI use in this area