How are law firms actually using AI in 2026?
When we wrote about AI in December 2023, most lawyers were still experimenting. That stage is over. Today AI shows up across ordinary legal work:
- Organizing records. Injury cases involve thousands of pages of medical records, bills, police reports and photos. AI can sort them, build a timeline and flag gaps.
- Summarizing. Deposition transcripts (sworn, recorded interviews taken before trial) can run hundreds of pages. AI can produce a first summary for a lawyer to check.
- First drafts. Letters, demand packages and routine documents can start as an AI draft.
- Research starting points. AI can point a lawyer toward cases and statutes. It cannot be trusted to say what those cases hold.
The good version of this is simple. The machine handles volume. The lawyer handles judgment. That frees time for the work that wins cases: investigating, preparing witnesses, negotiating and trying cases in front of a jury.
TORKLAW builds its own legal technology. We hold it to one rule: a lawyer reviews and owns every piece of work that goes out the door.
What can go wrong when a law firm uses AI?
Three things, mainly.
It makes things up. Generative AI (tools that write new text, like chatbots) predicts words. It does not know facts. It can produce a court case that never existed, with a realistic name and citation. The legal world calls this a “hallucination.” California courts have now sanctioned lawyers who filed briefs containing invented authority.
It can leak information. Many public AI tools keep what users type. Some use it to train future versions. If a staff member pastes your medical history into the wrong tool, that information may leave the firm’s control.
It can make people lazy. A deadline is close. The draft looks polished. The temptation is to trust it. That shortcut is where most AI failures start.
Is my information safe if my lawyer uses AI?
It should be. The rules are clear that the duty to protect your information does not change because the tool is new.
California lawyers owe clients a strict duty of confidentiality. That means keeping your secrets, including your medical and financial details. The State Bar of California’s practical guidance on generative AI, first issued in November 2023 and revised in May 2026, applies that duty directly. It says a lawyer must not put a client’s confidential information into an AI tool that may present material risks to it, unless the client gives informed consent. It tells lawyers to read a tool’s terms of use and privacy policy, not just the sales pitch.
The American Bar Association reached a similar place in Formal Opinion 512 in July 2024. It said that for “self-learning” AI tools, which can reuse what users enter, a client’s informed consent is required before the lawyer inputs information about the representation. A boilerplate consent buried in an engagement letter is not enough.
In practice, the question is not “Does the firm use AI?” The question is “Which AI, and where does my information go?” A private, secured system under contract with the firm is very different from a free public chatbot.
What’s new since 2023?
A lot has changed since our original article. These are the developments that matter most to clients:
- November 2023: State Bar of California guidance. The State Bar’s Board of Trustees approved practical guidance on how existing ethics rules apply to generative AI, covering confidentiality, competence, supervision, candor to courts and fees.
- July 29, 2024: ABA Formal Opinion 512. The ABA’s first formal ethics opinion on generative AI addressed competence, confidentiality, client communication and fees. On fees, it said lawyers generally may not charge clients for time spent learning how to use an AI tool.
- September 1, 2025: California courts adopt AI rules for themselves. The Judicial Council adopted California Rule of Court 10.430 and Standard of Judicial Administration 10.80. Any court that allows its judges or staff to use generative AI had to adopt a use policy by December 15, 2025. The policies must bar entering confidential or personal identifying information into public AI systems and require reasonable steps to verify AI output.
- March to May 2026: proposed changes to the ethics rules. The State Bar released for public comment new AI-specific commentary to six Rules of Professional Conduct, covering competence, client communication, confidentiality, candor to the court and supervision. Comment closed May 4, 2026. Changes to the rules take effect only with California Supreme Court approval.
- May 14, 2026: updated State Bar guidance. The revised guidance addresses “agentic” AI, meaning tools that can take actions on their own. It says more autonomy means more supervision, not less. It also says general AI subscription costs are overhead, and a firm should not mark up case-specific AI costs without the client’s written consent.
- August 2026: Senate Bill 574. The Legislature passed SB 574, which would put AI duties for California attorneys into statute. The bill bars delegating the practice of law to generative AI and bars entering confidential or personal identifying information into public AI systems. It was presented to the Governor on September 9, 2026. As of late September 2026, it was awaiting the Governor’s action.
What can a lawyer do that AI cannot?
Our view from 2023 holds. The tools got faster. The human part of the job matters more.
- Understand you. After a serious crash, people are scared, in pain and worried about money. A lawyer has to listen and earn trust. Software does not do that.
- Make judgment calls. Whether to settle, whom to sue, which expert to hire and when to push are decisions that weigh law, facts, risk and your goals.
- Negotiate. Insurance adjusters are trained to pay as little as possible. Reading the other side and knowing when to walk away is human work.
- Stand up in court. AI does not pick a jury, cross-examine a witness or explain to twelve strangers what your injury has taken from you.
- Take responsibility. Only a licensed lawyer answers to the court, the State Bar and you.
What to ask a law firm about AI
You do not need to be a technology expert to protect yourself. Ask these questions before you sign, or anytime during your case:
- Does your firm use AI on client matters? For what tasks?
- Which tools? Are they private systems under contract with the firm, or public chatbots?
- Does the tool keep my information or use it for training?
- Who reviews AI-assisted work before it goes to the insurer or the court?
- Does a licensed attorney check every citation and fact in a court filing?
- Will I be charged for any AI costs? (In a contingency fee case, where the lawyer is paid a share of the recovery, ask how case costs are handled.)
- Can I ask that AI not be used on certain parts of my case?
Clear answers are a good sign. Vague answers are a warning.
If you were hurt in a car accident or suffered a catastrophic injury, the lawyer handling your case should be able to explain who does the work and how your information is protected. You can read more of our writing on our publications page.
What this means for you
AI is now part of how legal work gets done. Ask how it is used. Expect a real person to review what matters. Protect your own information, too. Before you type details about your injury or your case into a public chatbot, talk to your lawyer. What you enter goes to a third-party company under its terms, not to your legal team.
Frequently asked questions
Will my lawyer tell me if they use AI on my case?
Not always automatically. The State Bar’s guidance says lawyers should consider telling clients about AI use, especially when it materially affects the case or how decisions are made, and must follow a client’s instructions limiting AI. You can always ask.
Can a law firm put my medical records into ChatGPT?
Under the State Bar’s guidance, a lawyer must not enter your confidential information into an AI tool that presents material risks to it without your informed consent. Ask which tools the firm uses and whether they keep your data.
Will AI replace my lawyer?
No. AI can speed up paperwork and research. It cannot make judgment calls, negotiate, try a case or take responsibility for your case. Only a licensed attorney can do that.
Should AI make my case cheaper?
It can make some tasks faster. The State Bar’s 2026 guidance says hourly billing must reflect time actually spent, and general AI subscription costs are overhead. In a contingency fee case, ask how the firm treats AI-related costs.