As generative AI becomes more common in litigation workflows, courts are increasingly being asked to address how AI tools may be used with confidential discovery materials.
A recent decision from the District of Colorado provides insights into one court’s approach to generative AI in discovery. The ruling distinguishes between public consumer AI tools and enterprise
An expert may see AI as a faster way to find the right documents. Opposing counsel may see the prompts as a map of how the expert built the universe of evidence. That tension is at the center of Conservation L. Found., Inc. v. Shell Oil Co.
Continue Reading The New Litigation Metadata: Experts’ AI Prompts May Not Stay Behind the Scenes
The Nassau County Supreme Court addressed whether AI prompts and outputs may be protected in litigation when it quashed non-party subpoenas seeking those materials.
This eDiscovery blog post below identifies general considerations that legal teams and vendors may find useful when thinking about data assessment and the preservation of chat threads in connection with a litigation hold.
Continue Reading Mastering the Chat Matrix: Technical E-Discovery Considerations for Collaborative Communications Platforms
On March 30, 2026, the Seventh Circuit addressed sanctions for an attorney citing AI-generated hallucinations and clarified the responsibilities of opposing counsel when receiving such a pleading.
Morgan v. V2X explored court‑crafted limits on using AI with confidential discovery and what AI‑specific protective orders may mean for litigants.
In Morgan v. V2X, Inc., a Colorado district court examined how AI use in litigation affects work product protection and the handling of confidential information.
As generative AI enters disclosure practice in England and Wales, courts and practitioners face emerging questions about transparency, proportionality, and human oversight.
Continue Reading Disclosure in England and Wales: Where to Next on the AI Journey?
Courts in England and Wales are confronting the risks of AI-assisted document preparation, with recent decisions highlighting the potential risk of fabricated case citations in common law jurisdictions where precedent is paramount.
In February, a federal judge in the Southern District of New York issued case-ending sanctions against an attorney who failed to “learn from his mistakes” and repeatedly submitted filings containing false, AI-generated citations to the court.
Continue Reading Court Sanctions Highlight Potential Risks of Using Unchecked AI in Litigation