We've all lost count of the times we've received an email, policy, or memo from a lawyer so "well written" that nobody understands it. It's frustrating, and you want to write back: "Great legal summary - I have no idea what it means." Unfortunately, that's often how legal communications are received by business colleagues and stakeholders: overly complicated, needlessly formal, and disconnected from everyday business needs - not human.
Mollick notes in his book that AI tools have the capacity to create enhanced expertise on anything and everything by everyone and anyone. This dynamic is already playing out in legal practice. Want to be an expert on non disclosure agreements? You can do several AI prompts and get much of what you need to know to get by, at least for more routine questions.
TO BE ANSWERED USING GENERATIVE AI: How much do you use generative AI tools such as ChatGPT right now? What's your prediction for how much you will use them by the time you graduate from law school? Why?
Justice Breyer delivers well-crafted critiques that misunderstand that proponents aren't trying to win the argument, they're trying to have smart people treat them like they have ideas worth engaging.
Law professors have avoided generative AI, but the Texas A&M Journal of Property Law is pioneering AI-assisted scholarship for legal writing, acknowledging its inevitable influence.