Letter · Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools
Client consultation when generative AI affects a significant decision (United States)
A short consultation for the case in which a generative AI tool's output will influence a significant decision, or the client has asked whether a tool was used, including where confidentiality consent is not required.
- 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 4 authorities it cites, for United States.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use when Formal Opinion 512's communication duty is in play: the client asks whether a tool was used, the client's guidelines require disclosure, or the tool's output will influence a significant decision. Do not send it as a standing notice on every matter.
Used for these tasks
- Draft client-facing disclosures that the firm uses AI on the matter
- Review a client-facing chatbot or intake script against the no-advice line
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 turn the lawyer's notes on what the tool did into a first draft of this consultation. The lawyer decides whether the decision is significant and sends the consultation only after checking it.
AI may
- Draft the description of the task and the output from the lawyer's note of what was actually run
- List questions the client would need answered to decide the next step, without answering them
- Flag a draft that does not say whether a lawyer has reviewed the output
AI must not
- Must not decide that a decision is or is not significant
- Must not present the tool's output as the lawyer's advice
- Must not say the firm uses tools it does not use, or hide a tool the lawyer used on the decision
- Must not send the consultation
The lawyer checks
- The trigger is real: a question from the client, a guideline, a fee effect, or output that will influence a significant decision
- The letter distinguishes the tool's output from the lawyer's own judgment and says which one the client is being asked to rely on
- Any input of information relating to the representation was already covered by a tool-specific consent, or did not happen
- A court disclosure rule, if a filing will follow, is checked separately and is not satisfied by sending this letter to the client
Method: how the Green, Yellow and Red levels are decided. This is guidance for planning, not legal advice.
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
- Chatbot transcript sample review worksheet
- Client notice: how we use AI on your matter, with consent form
- Client consent to input information into a generative AI tool (United States)
- Terms of use and opening disclaimer for a client-facing legal AI assistant
- Public legal information accuracy review record
- Pre-launch assurance and supervision checklist for client-facing AI tools
- No-advice scope and blocked-topics schedule for a client-facing assistant
- No-advice notice for a client-facing tool (United States)
- Collection notice for AI intake and triage tools (APP 5), with short in-chat version
- Client-facing AI incident and near-miss report
- Note escalating a client-facing tool transcript to a lawyer (United States)
- Periodic supervision minute for a client-facing AI tool
- Human escalation and handoff protocol for client-facing AI tools
- Client letter: using AI tools with your legal matter (confidentiality, privilege and evidence)
All precedents for Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools · Tasks and AI use in this area