Question 1

Can a law firm use AI without risking privilege or confidentiality?

Accepted Answer

Yes, with the right controls. The risk is not AI itself, it is client material entering tools the firm does not control. We pair a GREEN, YELLOW, RED data classification keyed to authorization with enterprise-grade tools configured for legal work: no-training commitments, SSO, and retention and access controls. Privileged and confidential material only touches tools the firm has approved and configured, and the rest of the work still gets modern AI capability.

Question 2

What does ABA Formal Opinion 512 mean for our firm?

Accepted Answer

Formal Opinion 512, issued in July 2024, addresses generative AI directly. Lawyers must reasonably understand the tools they use, protect confidential client information, supervise how the firm and its staff use AI, and consider when clients should be informed. In practice that means a firm needs a real AI policy, an approved-tools list, and training, not an informal understanding that people will be careful.

Question 3

Who writes the policy, and is our counsel involved?

Accepted Answer

The policy is co-developed with your firm leadership, with your counsel in the loop from the start, and it goes through your counsel before adoption. We do not practice law and we do not pretend to. We bring the structure, the GREEN, YELLOW, RED classification keyed to authorization, and the experience of what has held up under scrutiny. Your firm owns the policy, and your lawyers have the final word on it.

Question 4

Does pasting a document into a public AI tool waive privilege?

Accepted Answer

It hands opposing counsel the argument, and that is bad enough. Sharing privileged material with a third-party tool that may retain or train on it invites a waiver fight and sits uneasily with the duty of confidentiality regardless of how that fight ends. The safe posture is not to create the question. Keep privileged material out of public tools and inside the tools the firm has approved and configured for it.

Question 5

Can AI help with discovery and document volume without creating new risk?

Accepted Answer

Yes, if autonomy is capped on purpose. We automate the repetitive, low-risk work, intake, sorting, naming, and classification of case files, with verify-before-confirm logic, an append-only audit trail, and human-only ratification. The legal judgment stays with the lawyer who has to answer for it. That is what keeps the work product defensible.

Question 6

How do engagements run and what do they cost?

Accepted Answer

Fixed-fee discovery first, then a fixed-fee pilot, then an optional monthly advisory retainer. You know the scope and the price before any work starts. We are independent, with no resale and no vendor commissions, so the recommendation serves your firm, not our margin.

AI for law firms where privilege is on the line.

Once client material enters a public tool, you cannot take it back.

Controls that protect privilege, not a blanket ban nobody follows.

Safe AI configuration

A law firm AI policy that holds up

Document automation for case files

Claude rollout and training

You know the scope and the price before any work starts.

Fixed-fee discovery

Fixed-fee pilot

Optional retainer

Partners asking for an AI answer?

AI Readiness Checklist

The Regulated Firm's AI Readiness Checklist

Common questions from law firms

Give your firm AI it can defend.