There has been a lot of conversation about the benefits, and drawbacks, of AI. But how about the pet peeves? As an attorney, it’s becoming increasingly frustrating to spend time crafting thoughtful, experience-based legal advice in an email to a client only to receive a generic, AI-generated response in return.

Those replies often miss nuance, ignore jurisdiction-specific issues, and misquote applicable case law. In response, I have been polite in pointing out the problems with the response, such as an explanation as to what the case law truly says or why my advice is specifically responsive to their case. 

In some cases, I have then received another clearly AI-generated response.  I have not confronted the clients with their clear use of AI-generated responses. In most cases, I have reminded them that they hired me for my expertise and that they need to trust my advice if our professional relationship is going to continue. 

When clients rely on AI instead of engaging directly, I think it undermines trust and turns a professional relationship into a one-sided conversation. Other professionals, are you seeing this too, and how are you handling it?