---
title: "Client consultation when generative AI affects a significant decision (United States)"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/precedents/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/us-client-consultation-significant-ai-decision"
type: "precedent"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "a43-us-client-consultation-significant-ai-decision"
area_id: "A43"
kind: "letter"
ai_level: "yellow"
version: 1
task_ids: ["A43-A20260923-2", "A43-T1-R1"]
law_stated_as_at: "2026-10-22"
---

# 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.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/precedents/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/us-client-consultation-significant-ai-decision  
Law stated as at: 2026-10-22

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

## Key facts

- Kind: Letter. A letter or email you adapt and send.
- Practice area: [Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools.md)
- Jurisdictions: United States
- AI level: Yellow. You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
- Law stated as at: 2026-10-22
- Status: Maintained. Checked on 2026-10-22 against the 4 authorities it cites, for United States.

## 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](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/draft-client-facing-disclosures-that-the-firm-uses-ai-on-the-matter.md)
- [Review a client-facing chatbot or intake script against the no-advice line](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/review-a-client-facing-chatbot-or-intake-script-against-the-no-advice-li.md)

## 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

## Authorities

- [ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (July 29, 2024)](https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-512.pdf)
- [ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.4 (Communications)](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_4_communications/)
- [ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.1 (Competence)](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_1_competence/)
- [State Bar of California, Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct, Practical Guidance for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law (2026 revision, replacing the November 2023 guidance)](https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/ethics/Generative-AI-Practical-Guidance.pdf)

## Full text and drafting notes

The full text and the drafting notes are not part of this public page. Signed-in firm accounts can read them at https://ailawframework.com/precedents/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/us-client-consultation-significant-ai-decision and through the signed-in MCP connector https://ailawframework.com/mcp/firm.

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