AI Defeats Three Lawyers? Is This the End for Lawyers?
A victim of a car accident successfully utilized generative AI on his own to defeat the defendant, who had hired three top lawyers, in what was originally a guaranteed win case.
Most lawyers, upon reading this, might think it is merely sensationalism. After all, the facts of the criminal case involve being assaulted after a car accident, a case that is almost certain to win, especially since the chances of winning are already high after the prosecutor’s indictment. It almost seems like one could win by writing the complaint with their eyes closed.
However, if we stop our analysis there, we would underestimate the significant implications revealed by this event.
Transformation of Lawyers’ Core Value
Upon closely examining the news footage, it becomes apparent that this individual did not use AI randomly; he was a “correct” user. I believe this highlights the true value of legal practitioners in the age of AI.
First, is this the end of free consultations? High-quality prompts are incredibly valuable.
We see that the prompts given to the AI by this individual were not whimsical descriptions of his own, but rather conclusions and recommendations he had organized from various lawyers’ “free consultations.” This is crucial. Fellow lawyers, please consider carefully: free consultations may be dressing up a competitor.
Previously, we believed that the most disruptive advancement of generative AI lay in its ability to deeply interpret and integrate “unstructured data.” Meeting notes, several lawyers’ strategic notes, and the client’s oral recounting of facts—AI can organize these seemingly chaotic pieces of information into a logical legal document.
However, garbage in, garbage out. The quality of the input directly determines the success or failure of the output. A client who vaguely states, “I was assaulted; how should I sue him?” will yield vastly different results from one who can provide “integrated professional opinions from multiple lawyers.” Your free consultations, the professional judgment, and litigation strategies you provide have unknowingly become the fertilizer for the other party’s AI training, optimizing its prompts. The client is essentially using your intellectual output to guide a digital assistant that does not tire or complain. Therefore, I must say, lawyers, stop providing free consultations. In the age of AI, every professional output you produce could become an extremely valuable prompt.
Lawyers as “Orchestrators”
This individual understood “layered processing.” He separated “statement of facts” from “basis of claims” in the complaint, and even personally verified legal provisions to ensure the AI did not produce “hallucinations.”
What does this indicate?
He comprehended the “structure” of a legal case. He recognized that facts and legal applications are two different matters that need to be handled separately to avoid confusion, and he also understood that AI outputs must be validated by humans. This is the most crucial value I believe future legal practitioners will hold—becoming an “orchestrator.”
Where Does Our Professional Knowledge Manifest?
When a client brings a personal injury case to us, we know to categorize it as a criminal injury offense and remind them of the possibility of accompanying civil lawsuits. We are aware of the elements of criminal offenses and the basis for civil tort claims, as well as the subtle distinctions between the two.
This knowledge serves as the blueprint we use to “design the structure.”
With the assistance of AI, the role of lawyers is no longer about painstakingly writing every word; rather, we become the project commander and system architect. We are responsible for:
- Defining the problem: Transforming the client’s chaotic needs into clear legal issues.
- Designing the process: Planning the steps for handling the case, such as which evidence to collect first, whether to address criminal or civil matters first, and what sections should be included in the complaint.
- Assigning tasks: Delivering precise prompts to AI for executing each designed element.
- Quality control: Reviewing AI-produced content, verifying the correctness of legal provisions, and infusing human empathy and strategic adjustments.
Conclusion: How to Make “Orchestration” Smoother?
From this seemingly simple case, we glimpse the next step in AI evolution and the inevitability of lawyers’ transformation. We are no longer just legal text artisans; we are now “orchestrators” wielding powerful tools.
In the future, those who master this “orchestration” ability and understand how to collaborate with AI will be the ones who thrive significantly.