Free AI diagnosis: 30 minutes, and you leave with a plan

How-to

How to use AI legal research safely, step by step

A practical method for using AI to find and summarize law faster, while checking every citation and meeting your ethics duties.

Updated 5 min read

The short answer

AI legal research works when you treat the tool as a fast first draft, not an authority. Frame a narrow question, let AI surface and summarize sources, then verify every citation in the primary source before you rely on it.

Key points

  • Frame one narrow, specific question
  • Use AI to find and summarize sources
  • Verify every citation in the original
  • Keep client information private
  • Record how you did the work

Step by step

Six steps to research with AI

Follow them in order. The checking steps matter most.

  1. Frame the legal question

    Write the jurisdiction, the facts that matter, the issue and the outcome you need to support.

  2. Choose what you may share

    Strip names and confidential facts, or confirm client consent before entering anything.

  3. Ask AI for sources and summaries

    Request relevant statutes, cases and a short summary of each, with the citation listed.

  4. Pull every source yourself

    Open each cited case or statute in an official or trusted database and read the passage.

  5. Check what the source actually says

    Confirm the quote exists, the holding matches the summary and the authority is still good law.

  6. Document the work

    Save the prompts, the sources checked and your conclusion in the matter file.

Why checking comes first

Trusting the output

  • Fluent but possibly invented
  • Fake cases look real
  • Errors reach the filing

Verifying the output

  • Each source opened and read
  • Quotes matched to the original
  • Errors caught before filing

Language models can produce confident text that is simply false. Researchers call this hallucination, content that is fabricated or unsupported by sources but delivered as fluently as accurate output.

Legal tools built for lawyers reduce the problem but do not remove it. Stanford researchers found that products from two major legal publishers each produced wrong information more than 17% of the time.

Lawyers know the risk. In the ABA's 2024 technology survey, three-quarters of those holding back on AI named hallucinations as the reason.

What went wrong in a real case

  1. 01

    Ask the chatbot

    Lawyers requested supporting cases.

  2. 02

    Skip the check

    The citations were not opened.

  3. 03

    File the brief

    Fake opinions reached the court.

  4. 04

    Face the penalty

    The court ordered a $5,000 payment.

In Mata v. Avianca, a chatbot made up court opinions, quotes and citations. The lawyers then filed them.

The federal court said lawyers act as gatekeepers for the accuracy of what they file. It set a $5,000 penalty.

The lesson is practical: a citation you have not opened is not a citation you can use.

Protect client information

Safe to enter

  • Anonymized facts
  • General legal questions
  • Public statutes and cases

Hold back

  • Client names and details
  • Privileged strategy
  • Anything without consent

Typing facts into a tool can disclose them. The ABA's Formal Opinion 512 says informed client consent is required before entering information about a representation into a self-learning generative tool.

The same opinion lists duties that apply: competence, confidentiality, communication with clients, supervision of staff, candor toward the tribunal and reasonable fees.

When in doubt, anonymize the facts or ask your own firm's policy before you paste anything.

  • Remove names, dates and identifying details
  • Check the tool's data and retention terms
  • Get consent when the rules require it
  • Supervise anyone on your team who uses it

Keep your judgment in charge

Good for AI

  • Finding candidate sources
  • Summarizing long opinions
  • Drafting a first outline

Needs you

  • Confirming good law
  • Applying facts to the rule
  • Final advice to the client

Under California State Bar guidance, a lawyer stays fully responsible for work made with AI help. Professional judgment cannot be handed over to the tool.

AI is good at speed, such as finding candidate sources and summarizing long opinions. It is weak at knowing whether a case is still good law or fits your facts.

BLS projections point to automation freeing lawyers for client meetings and strategy, not replacing them. The guide to AI in legal work covers the wider picture.

Document how you worked

  • Your prompt

    Keep the exact question you asked.

  • Sources opened

    List each case and statute you opened.

  • Check date

    Note the date and what you confirmed.

  • Your conclusion

    Write your own reasoning.

A short record protects you if a result is questioned. Save the prompt, the sources you opened and the date you checked them.

This also makes the next search faster, since your verified sources and notes can be reused on similar matters.

Our data

What AI answers when buyers ask

We asked ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity 10 buyer questions about AI for law firms. They named 116 companies, and 84% appeared in only one of the three.

CriterionChatGPTGeminiPerplexity
Companies named395255
Sites cited mostclio.com (4 of 10)lumay.ai (5 of 10)clio.com (3 of 10)

Nexum measurement, October 20, 2026, via DataForSEO: 10 buyer questions to each AI, US English, 30 answers in total. 11 companies appeared in all three. Google showed an AI Overview for 7 of the 10 questions.

FAQ

Questions about AI for legal research

  • Treat them as leads, not answers. Stanford researchers found that tools built for lawyers still produced false information in more than one in six tests, so verify each source yourself.

  • Content the model makes up or cannot support from real sources, written as confidently as accurate text. Common examples are invented cases and quotes. See the definition of AI hallucination.

  • Open the case or statute in an official or trusted database, find the quoted passage, confirm the holding matches the summary and check the authority has not been overturned.

  • Yes, when you meet your professional duties. ABA Formal Opinion 512 says competence, confidentiality, supervision, candor to the court and reasonable fees all still apply.

  • Often yes. The ABA opinion says informed consent is required before entering client information into a self-learning tool. Anonymizing the facts reduces the risk.

  • Use varies with firm size. In the ABA's 2024 survey, 30% of lawyers reported using AI, ranging from 18% of solo attorneys to 46% at firms with 100 or more lawyers.

  • BLS projections show lawyer jobs growing 5% through 2035. Paralegal employment is projected to change little or not at all, as technology limits demand. See will AI replace paralegals.

  • Browse AI use cases in law for practical applications beyond research. See how we build an AI legal assistant.

Related

Keep reading

Final step

Pick a time. Let's talk.

You leave knowing which processes to automate first and what each one costs you today, whether we work together or not.

You can keep paying for manual work, or find out this week exactly what it costs you.

What happens on the call

  1. Before

    You answer 3 quick questions when you book, so we come prepared.

  2. On the call

    We find the manual work that costs you most and put a number on it, live.

  3. Decide

    An honest read on whether we're the right fit. If we're not, you'll hear it on the call.

Once you book, we look at your site and tools before the call, so the 30 minutes go to your numbers, not introductions.

Prefer to write first? Email us directly: contact@nexumautomations.com

30 minutes · Video call · Free