In his August Illinois Bar Journal Judging Your Writing column, “Chat Not,” First District Illinois Appellate Court Justice Michael B. Hyman experiments with ChatGPT and gauges its capability as a legal writing tool. He asks OpenAI’s free ChatGPT 3.5 to prepare memos on various legal topics and prods the tool when its answers lack substance. His conclusion—chatbots are not a viable option … yet.
“They lack awareness of the intricacies inherent in legal assignments and the interplay of legal argument, legal procedure, facts, and law,” Justice Hyman writes. “They can’t interpret complex concepts or laws. Plus, the chatbot’s references to citations and sources usually go astray. Worst of all, chatbots confidently present falsehoods as facts and make up information, which makes whatever they write as worthless as a pen without ink.”
Read the August IBJ article, "Chat Not."