This summer I followed the stories about the New York lawyers who got sanctioned for submitting ChatGPT-generated briefs with cites to non-existent cases with a certain amount of schadenfreude. But I was also, secretly, curious – how does one generate an entire brief from ChatGPT and what would it look like? So, I did what any reasonable attorney would do – I tried to harness the new AI technology for myself. My results were not quite what I expected – I came nowhere close to getting any sort of legal analysis or even substantive case law out of ChatGPT (how did those New York attorneys even do it?), but I did use ChatGPT successfully to help me revise and improve my own, already-written work product.

First, I asked ChatGPT for caselaw on economic duress (having recently briefed an issue involving economic duress, I was familiar enough with the defense to be able to spot-check ChatGPT’s answers). ChatGPT apologized and explained that it doesn’t “have access to real-time legal databases or the ability to provide specific case law information beyond my last training data in September 2021.” I asked whether I could even use ChatGPT to find legal citations to cases, and ChatGPT assured me that I could. It recommended “requesting a list of relevant cases related to a certain area of law.”

Accordingly, I asked for “a list of relevant cases related to the economic duress doctrine.” But again, ChatGPT demurred, telling me that it doesn’t have “real time access to current legal databases of the ability to provide specific lists of cases.”

I changed tactics, and asked ChatGPT if it could help me generate a brief explaining why the economic duress doctrine is not available when the threat was filing a lawsuit. This time, ChatGPT gave me an outline of a legal brief to “get me started,” provided the caveat that it was a “general outline” only, and recommended I consult with an attorney. While the outline correctly stated the general law regarding economic duress, including why a lawsuit is not a sufficient threat to create duress, it was a far cry from a brief I could submit to court.

At this point, I abandoned my attempts to have ChatGPT write me a legal brief. I was both relieved that generating a legal brief with ChatGPT was not exactly easy (again, how did those New York attorneys manage it in the first place?) and also a little annoyed that I lacked the skill to convince ChatGPT to give me legal cites, imaginary or real (did I not ask politely enough?).

After I gave up trying to create substantive legal briefings with ChatGPT, I found significantly more success when I asked ChatGPT for help with smaller, more discrete tasks. ChatGPT was quite helpful when I requested aid with refining paragraphs and clunky sentences. For example, when I asked ChatGPT to help me concisely refine a paragraph I had previously written as a summary of the changes to Colorado’s new non-complete law, I was pleasantly surprised with the results.