Artificial intelligence (“AI”) is no longer a futuristic concept discussed only in technology circles. It is embedded in the everyday tools attorneys use and is advancing at a rapid pace. Each year brings more sophisticated capabilities, and many believe the trajectory leads toward artificial general intelligence, where machines can replicate and even refine human reasoning and judgment. Whether that future inspires excitement or concern, it is clear that AI will continue to reshape the practice of law, including Estate Planning.
For Estate Planning attorneys, the central question is not whether AI will affect their work, but how to use it without compromising ethical duties. The starting point is competence. Under American Bar Association Model Rule 1.1, competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary for representation. Comment 8 to that Rule further explains that competence includes keeping abreast of “the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.” Technological proficiency is therefore part of an attorney’s ethical obligation.
Attorneys have relied on forms of AI for years through research platforms such as Westlaw and LexisNexis, as well as document automation systems like HotDocs and WealthCounsel, which generate customized Estate Planning documents based on structured client inputs. Today’s generative artificial intelligence tools go further by drafting correspondence, summarizing documents, reviewing contracts, and assisting with legal analysis. In Formal Opinion 512, the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility clarified that lawyers are not required to become experts in generative AI. They must, however, have a reasonable understanding of the specific tool they use, including its capabilities and limitations. Generative AI may provide a helpful foundation for legal work, but it cannot replace professional judgment. Blind reliance on AI-generated content risks falling short of competent representation.
Technological competence also intersects directly with confidentiality. American Bar Association Model Rule 1.6 provides that a lawyer “shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client,” subject to limited exceptions. This duty is broader than the attorney-client privilege and applies to all information relating to the representation, regardless of whether the information would be protected in litigation.
The integration of AI raises practical concerns. When attorneys input client information into third-party platforms, they must understand how that data is stored, processed, and protected. Cloud-based systems and remote access tools increase efficiency, but they also introduce risk. Competence requires more than delegating technology decisions to IT personnel. Attorneys must educate themselves through continuing legal education, vendor vetting, and internal training to ensure client information remains secure.
Consider a common scenario. An Estate Planning attorney uses a generative AI platform to draft a complex Trust using detailed financial and family information. If the attorney fails to review the output carefully or does not understand how the platform handles submitted data, the efficiency gained may come at the expense of ethical compliance. Even during initial consultations with prospective clients, confidentiality obligations attach and must be respected.
Artificial intelligence will continue to evolve, and its role in estate planning practice will expand. The ethical duties of competence and confidentiality, however, remain constant. By understanding both the benefits and the risks of AI tools, estate planning attorneys can incorporate innovation into their practices while preserving the trust that defines the attorney-client relationship.
Jensen Marie Puno, Attorney licensed in the Philippines
Content Associate
American Academy of Estate Planning Attorneys, Inc.
9444 Balboa Avenue, Suite 300
San Diego, California 92123
Phone: (858) 453-2128
www.aaepa.com
