What does Bryan Garner think of artificial intelligence?
作者：Bryan A. Garner
Editor’s Note: Starting in September, the Bryan Garner on Words column will be running monthly on ABAJournal.com.
Although we hear a lot of talk about artificial intelligence, a large segment of the legal profession knows little about it and hasn’t tried it. Some bemoan this technological revolution, fearing it will cause human skills to shrivel. My own conviction is that whatever harm bad actors might do with it, in good hands it’s a tool that can benefit people. For the lawyer, it’s like having a superb assistant who is remarkably efficient.
For those who need a concrete illustration, I’ve shown below what Perplexity—my own favorite AI program, given that it supplies footnotes with source materials—can do in 20 minutes. I have no relationship with Perplexity and know nothing about its developers. The scenario here is that I’m an Indiana solo practitioner.
Note that I’m not asking AI to do legal research for me but instead simply to respond to my prompts. The queries you submit will largely determine the utility of the responses. Remember that. Once I pushed the button, each response here took less than five seconds to generate. Naturally, the practitioner should control and edit the draft, just as if an assistant had produced it.
AI prompt: I represent a college student who we contend was wrongly accused of nearly running down two legal secretaries who were pedestrians in a downtown crosswalk. They came up to his bright orange car, parked a block away, and excitedly accused him of almost running them over seconds before. But he swears he had been snoozing in that parking spot for at least five minutes, waiting for his roommate to emerge from the building after working the night shift. We’ve now gone through a jury trial, and I must present a closing argument tomorrow. Basically, it’s his word against that of the secretaries who claim to recognize the bright orange car. Draft a 150-word closing argument.
Perplexity’s answer: Ladies and gentlemen, this case comes down to credibility. The state has no physical evidence, no surveillance footage, no independent witness confirming that my client was the driver who endangered these pedestrians. What they have are two understandably upset secretaries who saw a bright orange car and, in a moment of fear, linked it to my client. But color is not proof. Recognition in the heat of adrenaline is not certainty. My client testified, calmly and consistently, that he was parked a block away, waiting for his roommate, even dozing in the car. That account has never shifted. The law requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And when it is only two mistaken memories against a consistent, unshaken account, there is doubt—serious, reasonable doubt. You cannot ruin a young man’s future on guesswork. I ask you to return the only just verdict: not guilty.
AI prompt: I need to write a letter of recommendation for a paid summer intern—an undergraduate—who did a number of tasks for me quite well: She catalogued my legal treatises and helped me reorganize my library, scanned all my paper files to capture them electronically, organized those digital scans logically, edited a law review article I wrote (and she did a surprisingly good job), and analyzed and sorted the discovery produced by opposing counsel in a complex commercial lawsuit. She’s now applying to law school. Oh, and she has a great can-do attitude. Draft a three-paragraph recommendation.
Perplexity’s answer:
To Whom It May Concern:
I am pleased to recommend [intern’s name] for admission to law school. During her paid internship in my office, she consistently demonstrated reliability, initiative and a meticulous eye for detail. She catalogued my legal treatises; reorganized my library; and undertook the exhaustive task of scanning my paper files for digital archiving, organizing those scans logically and efficiently—a project that required ingenuity and persistence.
Her contributions extended beyond administrative duties. [Intern’s name] capably edited a law review article I authored, demonstrating editorial skill and a keen grasp of legal reasoning well above her undergraduate status. Moreover, she played a vital role in analyzing and categorizing discovery in a complex commercial lawsuit, applying sharp analytical thinking and uncommon diligence to make sense of complex document sets.
Throughout her internship, [intern’s name] approached every challenge with a refreshing can-do attitude and a willingness to learn. Her professionalism, adaptability and genuine enthusiasm for legal work set her apart. She is exceptionally well prepared for the rigors and rewards of law school, and I recommend her wholeheartedly.
AI prompt: I need a 30-day extension to file an appellate brief in the Indiana Court of Appeals. The reason is that I’m a solo practitioner, and I’m having to prepare for and conduct a two-week trial here in Indiana, which may conclude just about the time of the appellate deadline. Please draft a motion requesting an extension with no legalese but complying with every requirement in Appellate Rule 35.
Perplexity’s answer:
Verified Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief
I am the attorney for the appellant. I ask for an extra 30 days to file the appellant’s brief. I am a solo practitioner. I am currently preparing for and handling a two-week trial in [name of county], Indiana (Case No. [trial case number], [caption]), and this work overlaps with the deadline for the brief.
The judgment being appealed was entered on [date of final order]. No motion to correct error was filed (or if one was filed: It was ruled on or deemed denied on [date]). The notice of appeal was filed on [date]. My current deadline to file the brief is [current due date], triggered by [describe triggering event, e.g., “the filing of the notice of appeal”]. I am requesting that this deadline be extended to [requested new due date], which is a business day.
I have worked diligently but cannot meet the deadline without causing hardship. This is my first request for an extension, and I am filing it more than seven days before the deadline.
I verify that the statements above are true and correct.
Respectfully,
[Your yame]
[Your contact info]
Certificate of Service: I certify I served this motion on all parties by [method] on [date].
[Verification]
AI prompt: Redraft that motion with traditional legalese.
Perplexity’s answer:
Court of Appeals of Indiana
[Case caption and case number]
Appellant’s Verified Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief
Comes now the undersigned, counsel for appellant, and respectfully moves this honorable court, pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 35, for an extension of thirty (30) days within which to file the appellant’s brief. In support of this motion, counsel states as follows:
The judgment being appealed herein was entered on [date of final order].
No motion to correct error was filed (or if one was filed: It was ruled on or deemed denied on [date]).
The notice of appeal was filed on [date].
The relevant deadline for filing the appellant’s brief is currently [current due date], triggered by [describe event, e.g., the filing of the notice of appeal].
Counsel for appellant is a solo practitioner who is presently engaged in the preparation for and conduct of a two-week jury trial in the [name of court], Indiana, captioned [case caption], Case No. [number], which will conclude contemporaneously with the appellate deadline set forth above.
Accordingly, despite counsel’s diligent efforts, compliance with the present deadline is impracticable, resulting in hardship to counsel unless the extension is granted.
This is appellant’s first request for an extension of time to file the appellant’s brief in this cause.
The extension sought is for thirty (30) days, making the new requested deadline [new due date], which falls on a business day as defined by Indiana Appellate Rule 25.
This motion is timely filed at least seven (7) days prior to the expiration of the current deadline. Wherefore, appellant respectfully prays that the court grant a thirty (30) day extension of time, up to and including [new due date], for the filing of appellant’s brief, and for all other just and proper relief.
Respectfully submitted,
[Signature block]
Verification
I affirm under the penalties for perjury that the foregoing representations are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Certificate of Service
I certify that on this [date], a copy of this Motion was served upon all parties of record by [method of service], in accordance with the Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure.
AI prompt: Thank you.
Perplexity’s answer:
You’re very welcome—glad to help this morning! If you need further drafts, legal research or clarifications on Indiana appellate practice or anything else, just let me know.
Bryan A. Garner. (Photo by Karolyne H.C. Garner)
Bryan A. Garner is the author of The Winning Brief, Garner’s Modern English Usage and Legal Writing in Plain English.
This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.
关于《What does Bryan Garner think of artificial intelligence?》的评论
暂无评论