Among dozens of legal professionals surveyed, the majority only occasionally used AI.

Artificial intelligence is transforming the legal profession, improving efficiency and supporting complex legal tasks. Among its branches, generative AI stands out for its ability to create new content, drafting legal texts, summarizing case law, generating contract clauses, and reviewing documents. 

Unlike traditional AI, which mainly analyzes or classifies data, generative AI can produce first drafts and process large volumes of information, enabling lawyers to work faster and more effectively.

Generative AI is becoming part of everyday practice across large, mid-sized, and small law firms, as well as in-house legal departments worldwide. However, as with any emerging technology, adoption requires caution. Legal professionals must carefully review AI-generated content to ensure accuracy, quality, and compliance, while remaining vigilant for potential errors or “hallucinations.” 

Blunders in Using AI

Recent high-profile cases highlight the risks of relying too heavily on AI-generated materials. 

One involved a California attorney fined for filing a state court appeal filled with fake quotations generated by ChatGPT. 

Another concerned a consulting firm that granted a partial refund to the Australian government after a report it produced was found to contain alleged AI-generated errors, including fabricated or inaccurately attributed footnotes, citations, and references. 

These incidents underscore a crucial point: generative AI is a tool, not a substitute for lawyers. It can accelerate workflows, but professional judgment remains irreplaceable. While experts can spot discrepancies quickly, users who are less familiar with a topic face a greater risk of overlooking inaccuracies.

Among 50 legal professionals contacted, including law firm partners, senior and junior counsels, and law students based in the United States, Latin America, and Europe most respondents (76.9%) expressed significant concern about protecting client or sensitive data when using such tools. The majority reported using generative AI occasionally (61.5%), while a smaller group (30.8%) uses it frequently under strict internal guidelines. A remaining 7.7% reported not using generative AI at all.

Among those who use generative AI, about 75% rely on approved and reliable tools provided by firms, universities, or trusted technology vendors. 

These platforms are integrated with internal data protection measures and usage policies, ensuring compliance with professional and ethical standards.

Users in this group reported higher confidence in the quality and security of outputs, as institutional oversight offers accountability and reduces the risk of mishandling sensitive information.

“AI is becoming an integral part of our lives and a tool that all professionals will eventually need to embrace, as it will become part of everyday business. As lawyers, we must adapt to understanding the risks, implications, and boundaries to use AI effectively. It can help us streamline administrative processes and allow us to focus on more complex, analytical work,” stated Lourdes Marquez, a senior counsel at Revolut.

The remaining 25% of respondents, mostly those not currently using generative AI, expressed strong interest in gaining access to authorized tools. Many cited the lack of officially approved resources or institutional guidance as the main barrier to adoption. 

This highlights a growing gap between organizations that are proactively implementing generative AI responsibly and those that remain hesitant. Bridging this gap through education, policy development, and vendor partnerships could accelerate safe and effective adoption across the legal sector.

Verification practices remain critical. About 70% of respondents regularly check generative AI outputs against trusted legal sources, 23% do so occasionally, and 7% were unaware of generative AI’s limitations, including hallucinations or inaccurate results. Ethical practices vary as well: roughly half of participants follow formal internal guidelines, while the rest operate with limited or no structured policies.

Uneven access to certified tools creates challenges in maintaining confidentiality, complying with regulations, and upholding professional responsibility standards.

Confidence in AI’s Future

Despite these challenges, perceptions of generative AI are cautiously optimistic. 

Many respondents describe themselves as careful users who monitor outputs and apply boundaries, while others express growing confidence in using generative AI for legal research, drafting, and document review. 

Overall, the findings suggest that generative AI is becoming an integral part of modern legal practice and education. The key challenge lies in leveraging its benefits while maintaining accuracy, ethics, and trust.

“Artificial Intelligence is like a shattered mirror. While it can provide answers to your questions much like reflections in broken glass it doesn’t reveal the full picture,” stated Robert Masocha, LL.M. graduate from Loyola. 

“Some parts remain distorted or blurred, and it’s up to legal professionals to verify the information for accuracy. Still, it serves as a valuable starting point, offering guidance and direction, but it should never be relied upon entirely.” stated Lourdes Marquez, Fintech Attorney in LATAM.

The survey and observations reveal a clear trend: legal professionals are eager to integrate generative AI into their work provided it comes from reliable, authorized, and accredited sources. The main concern remains the preservation of client confidentiality and the ethical management of sensitive information. Adoption is strongest when supported by secure tools, institutional oversight, and clear policies.

The results also highlight a generational and organizational shift. Younger professionals and students are driving innovation, while senior practitioners recognize the operational and strategic advantages of GenAI when used responsibly. Institutions that invest in training, guidance, and ethical frameworks will empower attorneys to adopt these tools confidently.

In essence, the legal profession is moving toward a balanced future one that values both innovation and integrity. Generative AI is not a threat but an opportunity. When guided by human judgment, accountability, and regulation, it can enhance efficiency, expand access, and strengthen the delivery of legal services. By embracing GenAI thoughtfully, law firms and institutions can redefine how legal professionals research, advise, and advocate shaping a more effective and ethical legal system.

Julio Zerecero is a business and technology attorney licensed in Mexico and an LL.M. graduate from Loyola Law School in Los Angeles where he had the honor of delivering the commencement speech. After graduation, he collaborated with Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman LLP and is currently contributing to legal matters at Joseph Kauffman and Associates, Inc.  He actively engages with the U.S. legal profession as a member of the Professional Responsibility and Ethics Committee at the Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA) and as an editorial board member of Landslide Magazine (American Bar Association). Previously, he was vice president and secretary of the Foreign-Trained Attorneys and International Students Executive Boards at Loyola.  Zerecero has advised global leaders in technology and finance, including Amazon Web Services, Citi, Citibanamex, BBVA, and Aeromexico, providing strategic guidance on complex legal matters and digital innovation across Mexico, LATAM, and the Caribbean.