You can’t turn on the news or read an article online without hearing about Artificial Intelligence.
So, it’s fair to wonder how it’s being incorporated into your life in ways you may not even see or realize. That extends all the way to your legal services, and you would be justified in asking your attorney whether they are using AI, if it’s even allowed, and if so – is your personal information being kept safe?
We can only speak for our own firm in terms of how AI is specifically being used. However, we can also explain the current legal parameters around using AI in the legal field, so you can get a better idea of what to expect from any attorney or firm.
Is it legal for lawyers to use AI?
Yes, with conditions. Virginia’s Rules of Professional Conduct don’t ban AI. They do require attorneys to stay responsible for everything they do, no matter what tools they are using. The American Bar Association and VA Rule 1.6 agree that client consent is required before inputting client information into self-learning AI. The attorney and firm are responsible for implementing safeguards against unauthorized disclosure and to know how the AI systems they use process, store and potentially share data.
In general, there are three basic requirements every attorney should meet when using AI technology:
Competence. Attorneys must understand what AI can and can’t do well, and they must independently verify anything it produces. Professional judgment can’t be handed off to software.
Confidentiality. Attorneys must protect client information. Many consumer AI tools, especially free ones, may store what you type into them. Putting client information into those tools without proper safeguards can violate this duty.
Communication. Clients are entitled to transparency about how their lawyers work, including when AI is involved.
That’s not to say these three basic requirements are always met. In some very embarrassing and public cases, legal professionals have learned exactly where the line is. In a widely reported New York case, Mata v. Avianca, an attorney filed a brief that included six non-existent judicial decisions. The AI tool that was used had simply invented the cases in order to provide an answer (which is its primary goal), and unfortunately the attorney didn’t back check its references. When it came to light, the court imposed sanctions and fines on the firm. Since then, other courts have sanctioned lawyers for the same mistake, including a case where AI made up completely fictitious cases regarding hoverboard injuries. When AI produces text that sounds factual and authoritative, it’s called “hallucination.” The lesson is that a lawyer’s responsibility can never be fully delegated to a machine.
What is good practice, and what isn’t?
So, what is standard “good practice” for any law firm incorporating AI into their process? Here are some generally agreed upon thoughts:
Using AI for a first draft or a routine task, then reviewing every word.
Using only tools that have been vetted for security and confidentiality.
Training everyone on what the tools can and can’t do before they use them.
Being upfront with clients about the technology the firm uses.
By contrast, here are some (unfortunately) documented examples of “bad practice”:
Trusting AI-generated research or citations without checking them.
Pasting confidential client information into a free, public AI tool.
Letting AI make legal determinations or treating its answer as THE answer.
Using whatever tool happens to be handy, with no firm policy behind it.
How Davis Law Group uses AI
Every item on the “good practice” list above is written into DLG’s AI policy, and each item on the “bad practice” list is something that policy is designed to prevent. We think of AI as a capable administrative assistant. Yes, it can move quickly and save us time, but it needs supervision, and its work is always backchecked.
Think of it this way: AI is not “in front of us” leading us to a conclusion or result. It is a tool that we pull from our toolbox when we need it to perform a task based on our understanding, knowledge and experience.
In practice, that means we typically decide what needs to be done or communicated first, then use AI to help prepare the document. Because our attorneys already know what the outcome should typically look like, they can spot what’s accurate and what needs to change during their review. Any AI-generated content is treated as an initial draft only, and even the specialized legal AI tools we use are never the sole basis for a critical decision, such as interpreting a legal matter, drafting a legal memorandum, or giving advice. That is where AI saves time, and those time (and cost) savings go toward your legal matters and cases. We do check everything, every time.
Ahead of the curve
AI is advancing quickly, and many firms are still working out where it belongs in their practice. We believe responsible use is what puts a firm ahead of the curve, and that comes down to two things: using AI in ways that improve efficiency and putting clear rules around that use in writing.
That’s why we have a written, firm-wide AI policy. It covers every attorney, employee, and contractor with access to the firm’s systems, software, and devices, including personal phones, tablets, and home computers used for firm work. Everyone covered by it signs an acknowledgment that they have read, understand, and agree to follow it, and the policy is reviewed at least annually, or sooner when changes in the technology, the law, or our own operations call for it.
Choosing the right AI platforms
We don’t simply use whatever current AI tool is trending. Before any new tool is approved, the firm conducts due diligence on its safety, compliance standards, and relevance to our work, and carefully reviews its terms of use. Currently, the only AI tools approved for firm business are the AI features within our Westlaw, LexisNexis, CLIO, and Wealth Counsel subscriptions, plus Microsoft 365 Copilot Business within our Microsoft 365 work environment. If a tool isn’t on that list, it’s off-limits for firm business, regardless of who provides it, how it’s accessed, or whether it’s free or paid. That includes AI-powered browser extensions and plugins of any kind.
How we protect your information
We have implemented training for the AI tools we use, and no one is authorized to use those tools until they’ve received the proper training, including an understanding of each tool’s limitations and risks.
Our technical safeguards include application controls and web filtering, managed by our IT provider, that block unapproved AI tools. We also use firewalls, encryption, and malware screening. Importantly, we never put identifiable client information in open AI tools. Our policy strictly prohibits sharing client data with public or open AI systems. This includes “hidden” AI features that are increasingly added to everyday software through routine updates.
We also believe in open communication. If anyone at the firm becomes aware that firm or client data has been inadvertently entered into an unapproved AI tool, they must report it to a manager immediately so the problem can be addressed right away.
Our commitment to you
AI does not practice law at Davis Law Group. Our attorneys do. Every recommendation, every document, and every piece of advice you receive comes from an attorney who has reviewed it and stands behind it.
We’re also open about our use of technology. Our standard engagement agreement includes a Consent to Use of Technology that explains that we use tools like AI platforms, as approved by the firm, to assist in providing services, and how we protect your confidential information when we do. It also states that we will not knowingly include identifiable client confidential information in any interaction with an open AI system.
This is an evolving technology, and our written policy is reviewed regularly to keep pace with it, but one thing that will never change is our commitment to client services and your peace of mind. If you have questions about how technology is used in your matter, please ask. We’d be glad to walk you through it.
How Our Law Firm Does and Does NOT Use AI
You can’t turn on the news or read an article online without hearing about Artificial Intelligence.
So, it’s fair to wonder how it’s being incorporated into your life in ways you may not even see or realize. That extends all the way to your legal services, and you would be justified in asking your attorney whether they are using AI, if it’s even allowed, and if so – is your personal information being kept safe?
We can only speak for our own firm in terms of how AI is specifically being used. However, we can also explain the current legal parameters around using AI in the legal field, so you can get a better idea of what to expect from any attorney or firm.
Is it legal for lawyers to use AI?
Yes, with conditions. Virginia’s Rules of Professional Conduct don’t ban AI. They do require attorneys to stay responsible for everything they do, no matter what tools they are using. The American Bar Association and VA Rule 1.6 agree that client consent is required before inputting client information into self-learning AI. The attorney and firm are responsible for implementing safeguards against unauthorized disclosure and to know how the AI systems they use process, store and potentially share data.
In general, there are three basic requirements every attorney should meet when using AI technology:
That’s not to say these three basic requirements are always met. In some very embarrassing and public cases, legal professionals have learned exactly where the line is. In a widely reported New York case, Mata v. Avianca, an attorney filed a brief that included six non-existent judicial decisions. The AI tool that was used had simply invented the cases in order to provide an answer (which is its primary goal), and unfortunately the attorney didn’t back check its references. When it came to light, the court imposed sanctions and fines on the firm. Since then, other courts have sanctioned lawyers for the same mistake, including a case where AI made up completely fictitious cases regarding hoverboard injuries. When AI produces text that sounds factual and authoritative, it’s called “hallucination.” The lesson is that a lawyer’s responsibility can never be fully delegated to a machine.
What is good practice, and what isn’t?
So, what is standard “good practice” for any law firm incorporating AI into their process? Here are some generally agreed upon thoughts:
By contrast, here are some (unfortunately) documented examples of “bad practice”:
How Davis Law Group uses AI
Every item on the “good practice” list above is written into DLG’s AI policy, and each item on the “bad practice” list is something that policy is designed to prevent. We think of AI as a capable administrative assistant. Yes, it can move quickly and save us time, but it needs supervision, and its work is always backchecked.
Think of it this way: AI is not “in front of us” leading us to a conclusion or result. It is a tool that we pull from our toolbox when we need it to perform a task based on our understanding, knowledge and experience.
In practice, that means we typically decide what needs to be done or communicated first, then use AI to help prepare the document. Because our attorneys already know what the outcome should typically look like, they can spot what’s accurate and what needs to change during their review. Any AI-generated content is treated as an initial draft only, and even the specialized legal AI tools we use are never the sole basis for a critical decision, such as interpreting a legal matter, drafting a legal memorandum, or giving advice. That is where AI saves time, and those time (and cost) savings go toward your legal matters and cases. We do check everything, every time.
Ahead of the curve
AI is advancing quickly, and many firms are still working out where it belongs in their practice. We believe responsible use is what puts a firm ahead of the curve, and that comes down to two things: using AI in ways that improve efficiency and putting clear rules around that use in writing.
That’s why we have a written, firm-wide AI policy. It covers every attorney, employee, and contractor with access to the firm’s systems, software, and devices, including personal phones, tablets, and home computers used for firm work. Everyone covered by it signs an acknowledgment that they have read, understand, and agree to follow it, and the policy is reviewed at least annually, or sooner when changes in the technology, the law, or our own operations call for it.
Choosing the right AI platforms
We don’t simply use whatever current AI tool is trending. Before any new tool is approved, the firm conducts due diligence on its safety, compliance standards, and relevance to our work, and carefully reviews its terms of use. Currently, the only AI tools approved for firm business are the AI features within our Westlaw, LexisNexis, CLIO, and Wealth Counsel subscriptions, plus Microsoft 365 Copilot Business within our Microsoft 365 work environment. If a tool isn’t on that list, it’s off-limits for firm business, regardless of who provides it, how it’s accessed, or whether it’s free or paid. That includes AI-powered browser extensions and plugins of any kind.
How we protect your information
We have implemented training for the AI tools we use, and no one is authorized to use those tools until they’ve received the proper training, including an understanding of each tool’s limitations and risks.
Our technical safeguards include application controls and web filtering, managed by our IT provider, that block unapproved AI tools. We also use firewalls, encryption, and malware screening. Importantly, we never put identifiable client information in open AI tools. Our policy strictly prohibits sharing client data with public or open AI systems. This includes “hidden” AI features that are increasingly added to everyday software through routine updates.
We also believe in open communication. If anyone at the firm becomes aware that firm or client data has been inadvertently entered into an unapproved AI tool, they must report it to a manager immediately so the problem can be addressed right away.
Our commitment to you
AI does not practice law at Davis Law Group. Our attorneys do. Every recommendation, every document, and every piece of advice you receive comes from an attorney who has reviewed it and stands behind it.
We’re also open about our use of technology. Our standard engagement agreement includes a Consent to Use of Technology that explains that we use tools like AI platforms, as approved by the firm, to assist in providing services, and how we protect your confidential information when we do. It also states that we will not knowingly include identifiable client confidential information in any interaction with an open AI system.
This is an evolving technology, and our written policy is reviewed regularly to keep pace with it, but one thing that will never change is our commitment to client services and your peace of mind. If you have questions about how technology is used in your matter, please ask. We’d be glad to walk you through it.
Our Practice Areas Include:
Blog Categories
Recent Blog Posts
How Our Law Firm Does and Does NOT Use AI
September 29, 2026How a Legal Separation Should Operate Prior to Divorce in Virginia
August 27, 2026