Top Stories
All Sections
Finance
About
9 results for "attorney-client privilege"
Alston & Bird's April 2026 AI Quarterly finds courts issuing consequential AI rulings without a coherent framework, including a privilege-destroying ruling for law firms using commercial AI tools.
A federal magistrate judge in Michigan ruled that a litigant's ChatGPT conversations cannot be compelled by opposing counsel — the first ruling to extend work product protection to AI chat logs.
Major U.S. law firms are warning clients that sharing legal communications with AI chatbots could waive attorney-client privilege, following a ruling in which ChatGPT conversations were deemed potentially discoverable by opposing counsel.
Courts are now detecting four to five AI-hallucinated legal citations in filings per day, with sanctions exceeding $100,000—and law firms are adding clauses warning clients about attorney-client privilege risks.
Attorneys submitting AI-generated briefs with hallucinated case citations are facing mounting sanctions — while courts split on bans vs. deterrence, and law firms warn clients that chatbot use may destroy attorney-client privilege.
Major law firms are now writing AI privilege warnings into client contracts as courts sanction attorneys for AI-hallucinated citations — two converging risks the legal profession is only beginning to reckon with.
A Manhattan federal judge ordered a defendant to hand over 31 Claude-generated documents, ruling no attorney-client privilege exists between users and commercial AI platforms — and creating a circuit split with an opposite Michigan ruling the same day.
U.S. courts are sending urgent warnings to anyone using AI chatbots for legal work: feeding attorney communications into tools like ChatGPT may inadvertently destroy one of law's most fundamental protections.
A Manhattan federal judge ordered a former CEO to hand over 31 AI chatbot documents to prosecutors in a fraud case — ruling that AI conversations carry no attorney-client privilege.