Page 17 - Spring 2025

AI: A Cautionary Tale For Non-Lawyers

BY S. KATIE CALVERT

to them. If these addi�onal claims
Lately, it can be difficult to find common ground. are not included in the AI-
Most of us, however, would agree with this: a�orneys are expensive. generated complaint, the user may
Ar�ficial intelligence systems such as ChatGPT and Google Bard, on the lose the ability to assert these
other hand, are free to use. It is no coincidence then that, since the claims at a later date and could be
emergence of AI, ques�ons such as “how to dra� a contract with AI” and unable to recover their damages.
“can AI prepare my will” are becoming commonplace. AI can be used to Unfortunately, users who lack the
generate legal documents. But whether AI-generated legal knowledge necessary to convey
documents should be used is another ma�er en�rely. For those seeking their legal needs fully or accurately
to u�lize AI for the crea�on of legal documents like employment to the AI will likely be unable to
contracts, leases, and wills—proceed with cau�on. The risks associated assess for themselves the
with AI-generated legal documents may ul�mately outweigh the benefits. suitability of the documents
generated.

AI systems are powerful tools whose purpose appears limited only by Currently, most AI-generated legal documents are overbroad,
human imagina�on. In short, AI systems employ algorithms to analyze rudimentary, one-size-fits-all forms. For example, when asked to dra� an
informa�on and iden�fy pa�erns. AI systems “learn” from these pa�erns employment contract, ChatGPT generated a one-page fill-in-the-blank
and subsequently draw upon that knowledge. Many consumers interpret form that did li�le more than formalize the employer-employee
the overwhelming amount of a�en�on paid to AI as uncondi�onal rela�onship. This form did not include provisions that prohibited
endorsement. Indeed, as some of the greatest minds of our genera�on employees from disclosing confiden�al informa�on, that bestowed
implement AI across nearly every industry, it can be difficult to think of AI ownership of works created by the employee during their employment to
as anything other than an infallible marvel of technology. Someday, the employer, that barred employees from working for a compe�tor, or
perhaps in the near future, AI may live up to these expecta�ons. As it that accounted for numerous other issues which might arise in a given
stands, AI is a work in progress. context. Simple forms may suffice for some users; however, for many
others, the failure to include adequate detail can result in significant
Above all else, AI is not an omnipotent intelligence. In order for AI to harm. If, for instance, AI fails to include a non-compete agreement in a
generate a document, a user must first communicate to the AI what type sales-driven startup’s employment contract, the startup may fail when it
of document is needed and what informa�on the document should is unable to prevent its best salesperson from working with the local
contain. If the user’s communica�on is unclear, overbroad, or contains compe��on.
inaccurate informa�on, the quality of the AI-generated document will
suffer. The same holds true for legal documents. Users may simply lack Contrary to what some may believe, AI-generated legal documents do not
the knowledge necessary to convey their legal needs fully or accurately to necessarily comply with the law, nor do they ensure consumer
the AI, resul�ng in documents that do not adequately protect the user’s compliance. There are laws at the local, state, and federal level that,
interests. For example, a user who asks an AI to generate a complaint for collec�vely, touch upon nearly every aspect of daily life. Similari�es exist
breach of contract may not be aware that other claims are also available among the various laws; however, there are also significant differences in

Arkansas Community Banker | 17 | Spring