Quick Buzz Feed
A Florida Bar committee’s proposed advisory opinion regarding artificial intelligence is generating suggestions from a handful of attorneys, most of whom are eager for more guidance. The Special Committee on Artificial Intelligence Tools and Resources requested an advisory opinion earlier this year, and the Board Review Committee on Professional Ethics posted a public notice October 15. Although a draft is not yet available, the notice advised that it may cover lawyers’ use of agentic AI tools; the use of artificial intelligence tools to record, transcribe, and summarize communications; guidance to clients regarding their use of artificial intelligence tools; and updates to guidance provided in Florida Ethics Opinion 24-1.
A Florida Bar committee's proposed advisory opinion on artificial intelligence is prompting feedback from attorneys seeking more specific guidelines. The Special Committee on AI Tools and Resources initiated the request, leading to a public notice from the Board Review Committee on Professional Ethics. The anticipated opinion will cover lawyers' use of agentic AI, AI tools for communication processing, client guidance on AI use, and updates to existing ethics opinions.
Gainesville lawyer Nathan Nevins is the sole attorney opposing widespread AI use by lawyers. He recommends that AI be entirely banned for legal work, except for research, which he insists must be thoroughly double-checked. Nevins warns against the implications of AI systems negotiating legal documents, questioning the future integrity of the legal profession.
Civil trial lawyer Ryan Enage references Florida Supreme Court amendments requiring accurate citation in filed documents and the risk of AI-generated inaccuracies. He suggests that any court pleadings or papers prepared with AI assistance, by both attorneys and unrepresented parties, should include a clear disclosure stating 'Prepared with Assistance of Artificial Intelligence.'
Hialeah attorney Arianna Mendez expresses concern over clients using AI tools for legal advice or sharing sensitive information, highlighting potential discovery issues regarding records created, information disclosed, and materials needing preservation. She seeks guidance for lawyers on advising clients about these risks and potential requests for AI prompts, uploaded materials, and responses.
Jason K. Castro acknowledges that generative and agentic AI significantly boost the pace of legal document work but also increase opportunities for human error. He urges Bar regulators to differentiate between errors caused by 'revision fatigue' or 'version-control risks' and intentional misconduct, suggesting that the context and an attorney’s response to such errors should inform disciplinary assessments.
Florida Bar Ethics Counsel Jonathan Grabb confirmed that the Board Review Committee on Professional Ethics will review the submitted comments and the proposed advisory opinion during a meeting on December 10. The committee has options to proceed, modify, withdraw, or form a subcommittee for further action. Any drafted opinion will be publicly announced before being considered by the Board of Governors.