Related Posts
Smarht Parhk? Nice .
Anyone stopping JT this week?
Additional Posts in Litigation & Arbitration
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Smarht Parhk? Nice .
Anyone stopping JT this week?
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Download the Fishbowl app to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Copy and paste embed code on your site

Scan your QR code to download
Fishbowl app on your mobile

Very little. I do my own research and write my arguments. If something sounds clunky, I’ll feed that portion into an AI to see if it gives me something more clear and concise. Other than that, I’m not impressed with its research function. It gets a lot of things wrong.
It’s great for digging through discovery.
I don’t trust it to create content unless I know the material cold. Its job is to predict what you want to see, not always the truth. And you can tell it not to hallucinate and flag when it’s speculating, but it’s not perfect (and thus unreliable to self-regulate).
I do like using it as an editor. Half of its recommendations are crap, half are good. A few are great. But it doesn’t know which are which.
I also discourage junior associates from utilizing it, because it becomes a crutch. They’re lacking needed skills as it is, I’m worried this is just hastening our devolution into the blobs from WALL-E
This right here. 👆
I use AI in very specific circumstances and only for specific things. I would not recommend cultivating true reliance on it.
Specifically, I will use it to help find non-case law public domain evidence (I sue the govt a lot and like to use AI to comb through whatever it can find online as far as public govt posts and discussions about same), or to identify which section of code a law is in for an unfamiliar jurisdiction (so that I can go read the statute myself).
It is also great for outlining an argument, discovery, and proofreading, but by no means perfect on any of those things.
Depends which version. We recently got enterprise ChatGPT - that thing is unbelievable. It makes up cases so all that needs to be thoroughly checked, but makes the process a hell of a lot faster.
Also, as an aside, “AI” is not a monolith. You should not use CoCounsel, ChatGPT, Harvey, Lexis AI, etc. in the same manner, as they each have different pros and cons.
I use westlaw deep research as my first step. Then I poke around and read the cases and run some searches. Then I download the pdfs and plug them into copilot and ask it to draft something using only the cases I found and give it some other guardrails. Usually I need to heavily edit it after that. Once I’ve revised and checked all the cites, I plug it back into Westlaw brief check and see if it has any other suggests and to double check the cites. Probably saves me like 5 hours.
Make sure you know the law compared to the facts.
I don’t use it for research but for outlining my arguments then forming into cohesive paragraphs etc it’s pretty solid.
It’s also good for replying to opposing pleadings in picking out opposing arguments and finding flawed logic and weak reasoning.
Then I just find case law that further supports my position and go to town.
It’s also pretty good for refining and tightening up writing too in my opinion.