The emergence of agentic AI systems — autonomous software agents capable of planning, executing multi-step tasks, and operating with minimal human oversight — represents a qualitative shift in the deployment of artificial intelligence within legal…

The regulation of artificial intelligence in legal practice sits at the intersection of three distinct but overlapping regulatory regimes: professional responsibility rules governing attorney conduct, general AI governance frameworks emerging at the…

When an AI tool deployed in legal practice produces an erroneous output — a hallucinated citation, a mischaracterized precedent, a flawed contract clause — the question of liability is neither simple nor settled. The attorney who relied on the tool,…

AI hallucination — the generation of plausible but factually incorrect outputs by large language models — poses a distinctive challenge for legal practice. Unlike factual errors in other professional contexts, hallucinated legal citations,…

The duty of candor — the obligation of attorneys to be truthful in their representations to courts, clients, and opposing parties — is among the most foundational principles of legal ethics. Model Rules 3.3 and 4.1 impose affirmative obligations of…

The proliferation of AI tools in legal practice has outpaced the development of frameworks for evaluating, deploying, and governing those tools. Attorneys, law firms, and legal departments face a fragmented landscape of vendor claims, ethics…