Page 6 - SeptemberOctober25 Report

algorithmic bias, and maintain ethical
awareness when using AI in practice.
The law school has also taken steps
to ensure that what students learn aligns
with the needs of employers. “Chase grad-
uates will bring a combination of practical
skills in AI-assisted workflows and a
strong grounding in professional respon-
sibility related to AI use,” Young said.
Informal partnerships with practitioners
and adjunct faculty inform the curric-
ulum in real time, helping bridge the gap
between legal education and evolving firm
needs. Looking forward, Young predicts
AI literacy will soon be as essential as legal
writing or research. “Lawyers will need to
understand not only how to use these tools
effectively but also their limitations, risks,
What Law Students are
Learning Now, and
How it Can Work for You
Law schools aren’t waiting for law
firms to catch up. They’ve already begun
incorporating AI into the curriculum.
For the three area law schools: Salmon
P. Chase College of Law, University
of Cincinnati College of Law, and the
University of Dayton School of Law, AI
usage is now taught in conjunction with
research and writing. Further, each school
has adopted AI policies directly into their
student handbooks.
At Chase, Dean Judith Daar created
the Chase Law AI Task Force, consisting
of faculty and student members, to
address the College of
Law’s approach to AI.
Early on, students are
introduced to tools
like Lexis Protégé,
Westlaw CoCounsel,
and ChatGPT during
foundational courses in legal research,
methods, and writing. According to Eric
Young, Associate Dean for Library and
Technology Services and Chair of Chase’s
AI Task Force, “[t]hese courses teach
students how to effectively, efficiently, and
ethically use ChatGPT and similar tools,”
but they did not stop there. Young explains
that while legacy platforms like Lexis and
Westlaw remain central, the school is
also exploring relationships with newer
vendors such as Briefpoint, ClaudeAI,
Clearbrief, and Harvey. “A goal of the
Task Force is to reach out to newer legal
AI vendors... to better expose students to
the ever-evolving world of legal AI tools,”
he said.
But exposure to technology is just
the beginning. Chase emphasizes crit-
ical thinking in tandem with technical
skills. “AI should support, not supplant,
independent legal thinking and strong
writing skills,” Young notes, further
stating that “[w]hen used effectively, effi-
ciently, and ethically, AI tools can, for
example, streamline legal research, help
identify patterns, and assist with drafting,
allowing students to focus more deeply on
critical analysis, strategic thinking, and
persuasive communication.” Students are
taught to use AI as a tool while also being
able to question AI outputs, recognize
and ethical implications,” he said.
Law students today aren’t being told
to replace traditional skills with tech-
nology. They’re learning how to blend the
two in a way that strengthens their legal
work. By being trained to blend traditional
skills with modern tools grounded in crit-
ical thinking and guided by professional
responsibility, law students will enter the
workforce with a skillset that is an asset in
any practice. That’s not a threat to the legal
profession; that’s a sign of its continued
growth.
The Courts Have Approved
AI Use
Ohio
The Supreme Court of Ohio and the
Ohio Judicial System have taken proactive
steps by launching an Artificial Intelli-
gence Resource Library, which offers AI
ethics guidance for judges, attorneys,
and court staff. The site also links to a
wide range of resources, everything from
specific ethical guidelines to relevant rules
and legal reports, both from inside and
outside Ohio. To find it, visit the Supreme
Court of Ohio website and search “Artifi-
cial Intelligence Resource Library Ohio.”
Since many readers work in Hamilton
County, it’s especially important to know
about Local Rule 49, which governs the use
6 THE REPORT | September/October 2025 | CincyBar.org
AI should support, not supplant, independent
legal thinking and strong writing skills
Monica, Harrison, Alan, and Mitchell
enjoy family time at the
of artificial intelligence in court submis-
Cincinnati Museum Center.
sions. The rule outlines what’s expected
of attorneys, including the disclosure of
“AI-assisted technology in the creation
or editing of any document or evidence
submitted to the court.” It also requires a
“general description of the AI technology
used and its role in the preparation of the
materials.” It’s a step in the right direction,
one that encourages transparency while
also acknowledging AI’s growing role in
legal practice.
Kentucky
For AI use in Kentucky, attorneys
should look towards Ethics Opinion KBA
E-457 released by the Kentucky Bar Asso-
ciation. There, it outlines how an attorney
is expected to conduct
themselves when using AI,
including disclosure both
in the court room and to
clients.
Both states are
approaching AI with
caution and practicality. Judicial acknowl-
edgment signals that AI isn’t going away,
but its use must be grounded in transpar-
ency and ethical responsibility.
How Firms Can Stay Ahead:
A Practical Policy Example
The saying “stay ready so you don’t
have to get ready” rings especially true
here. Our firm, which employs clerks from
each of the aforementioned schools, has
implemented an AI policy to better use
the next generation’s skills.
“Every team member at Lawrence
Associates has a duty to safeguard client
confidentiality and to ensure we give our
clients the best, most accurate answers
to their legal questions. These duties
apply when using Generative AI, which
we define as large language models
(Chat GPT, Claude) or natural language
processing algorithms (Google, Westlaw).
You should never feed client specific infor-
mation into these programs, as it can be
stored and re-published to third parties.
This breaks client confidentiality. Instead,
anonymize requests given to Generative
AI so any output to third parties does not
directly implicate any particular client or
case. You can fill any specificity when you
write your final product.