Sign In
Free Newsletter
AI benefits, pitfalls in legal industry discussed in Daily Record webinar
(Submitted photo)
During a Thursday webinar by The Daily Record, three law professionals addressed the growing impact of artificial intelligence on their industry.
The panelists were Matthew Kohel, partner at Saul Ewing LLP; Tara Mobley, CEO of Stein Sperling; and Jessica Lynn Wherry, associate professor of law at the University of Baltimore. The Daily Record Editor Kendyl Kearly moderated the conversation sponsored by Stein Sperling.
“Time is the largest constraint that we all have,” Mobley said. She uses AI for ideation as an “antagonist” to challenge her thinking and even to read her emails and identify those that still require responses. AI, she said, can take over rote tasks, allowing professionals to concentrate on higher-level work.
“AI for note-taking and transcribing is transformative,” Wherry said, adding it can also be useful in the classroom as a pedagogical tool.
Potential pitfalls
All three panelists emphasized, however, that AI cannot replace human judgment.
Mobley recommends building verification into AI workflows. “We can’t have staff and students blindly trusting AI,” she said. Kohel agreed, noting that although trust is useful, verification is essential.
He pointed to AI hallucinations, in which systems can invent fake case law, false citations or nonexistent legal precedents. “Treat AI as a junior lawyer or associate,” he advised.
(Submitted photo)
Lawyers should read cases themselves, track down sources, test assumptions and verify everything AI produces, he said. Kohel also cautioned that AI can be a “people pleaser” and should be challenged rather than blindly accepted.
Mobley compared AI proficiency to building a muscle. “If we start using it as part of our toolbox, we have to practice and refine it,” she said.
Kohel, who chairs the Maryland State Bar Association AI and Legal Technology Task Force, said the group is working to determine acceptable AI use and update guidance as the technology and legal landscape evolve. The task force is also helping attorneys become certified in AI use.
Mobley views AI as a tool to supplement, rather than supplant, human workers. Her office is identifying rote tasks that can be automated. “Frankly, some tasks should have been automated a decade ago,” she said. Using AI to gather and organize information can free staff to focus on more sophisticated responsibilities.
When Kearly asked what AI might mean for paralegals and clerks, Mobley said, “AI doesn’t always eliminate — it allows staff to focus on higher level work.”
RELATED: How are MD attorneys using AI in practices?
For law students, Wherry said, AI presents both opportunities and challenges. Her school offers a secure AI platform, but when students were asked how they were using it, many said they were not, despite having access to ChatGPT and Claude. She believes some of the hesitation stems from ethical concerns and unanswered questions surrounding AI.
Regarding cheating, Wherry said plagiarism checkers aren’t the solution. Instead, the school has implemented a three-hour, proctored exam designed to determine whether students have mastered fundamental skills.
Copyright, bias and privacy
Kohel said representing AI companies and users has raised issues involving copyright infringement, training data, data privacy, commercialization, disclaimers and intellectual property. Lawyers increasingly must collaborate with coders, address clients’ contractual constraints and mitigate discriminatory outputs. New licensing frameworks may also be needed to ensure intellectual property owners are fairly treated.
(Submitted photo)
The panel also addressed algorithmic bias and its potential impact on marginalized groups.
Kohel noted that there is no comprehensive federal framework, leaving states to develop and amend laws as the technology evolves. Companies must ensure algorithms do not improperly screen people out of mortgages, education, jobs or other opportunities.
RELATED: AI hasn’t triggered flood of legal malpractice claims, but insurers watching
Wherry said organizations must understand their potential culpability and be transparent about how they use AI.
Privacy presents another significant concern, particularly when attorneys, clients or employees use public AI tools. Kohel said education is critical. Attorneys and clients need guidelines about what information can be entered into AI systems and how that information may be stored or used.
He also warned about “Shadow AI”—the use of AI without formal organizational approval or oversight. “Explain how you’re using it and the risks to clients,” he said.
The panel’s message was clear: AI is becoming an important piece in the legal toolbox, but its benefits come with responsibilities. Legal professionals will need to develop AI proficiency while maintaining rigorous verification, protecting privacy, addressing bias and safeguarding intellectual property. As technology continues to reshape the profession, human judgment and accountability will remain essential.
RELATED: 5 ways malpractice insurers say law firms can reduce AI risk
