Artificial Intelligence and the Practice of Law

What is changing and what is not

By Matthew Toma, Esq., MBA

Artificial intelligence is no longer a concept of the future. Most businesses already rely on it in some form—through accounting software, inventory systems, customer service platforms, or data analytics. These tools help companies move faster, process information efficiently, and make decisions with greater confidence. As AI becomes embedded in everyday business operations, it is also beginning to influence the legal services that businesses rely on.

Business owners naturally have questions: Will legal work become faster? Less expensive? Will technology replace tasks that once required long hours and significant cost? These are familiar concerns whenever technology enters a professional field. The reality is that AI is changing how legal work is performed, but it is not changing the fundamental role lawyers play in helping businesses manage risk, structure transactions, and navigate uncertainty.

This article is written for business owners rather than legal professionals. Its goal is not to explain the technical details of AI tools, but to clarify what AI can realistically do in the legal space, what it cannot do, and why that distinction matters when hiring counsel, planning transactions, or responding to disputes.

From a business perspective, the most noticeable change is efficiency. AI helps lawyers locate information quickly, summarize large volumes of material, and prepare initial drafts faster than before. Tasks that once took days can sometimes be completed in hours, keeping deals moving, reducing administrative friction, and making legal services feel more responsive during time-sensitive matters.

AI also improves organization. Business matters generate vast quantities of documents—contracts, leases, emails, policies, and financial records—which accumulate quickly during growth, financing, acquisitions, or disputes. AI can sort materials, identify recurring provisions, and flag issues that require closer review. When used carefully, these tools reduce delays and lower costs that often frustrate business owners.

However, efficiency is not the same as effective legal service. Legal work extends beyond producing documents or delivering quick answers. It involves assessing risk, anticipating consequences, and protecting business interests when facts are incomplete or uncertain. AI does not understand a company’s long-term strategy, its tolerance for risk, or the personal and financial dynamics that often influence decisions. These considerations require human judgment.

Responsibility remains firmly human. If a contract creates unexpected liability or a filing contains an error, accountability rests with the individual—not the software. Courts, regulators, lenders, investors, and counterparties hold people and businesses responsible for what they sign and submit. Human oversight is essential, even as legal tools become more sophisticated.

There are also risks in overreliance on AI. Accuracy is a major concern. AI may produce information that appears polished but is incorrect—a misstatement of law, a nonexistent citation, or an omission of a critical exception. Without careful review, errors can go unnoticed. Confidentiality is another concern: many AI systems operate through remote platforms with their own data policies. Uploading sensitive business information without understanding how it is stored or used can create exposure. Business owners should expect their lawyers to evaluate these risks carefully.

Billing expectations may evolve as well. When AI reduces the time required for certain tasks, clients naturally ask whether fees should change. This is reasonable, but legal fees are not solely based on speed. They reflect experience, judgment, responsibility, and outcomes. Faster drafts do not necessarily result in safer agreements; the value lies in what lawyers identify, negotiate, and advise—not simply in how efficiently text is generated.

For business owners, the most important question is not whether a lawyer uses AI, but how they use it. Technology can help disciplined professionals work efficiently, but it can also magnify mistakes if used without care. The difference lies in process, review, and judgment. Well-managed tools support thoughtful decision-making; poorly managed tools create false confidence.

Professional standards already require lawyers to understand the tools they use and the risks those tools introduce. Ethical rules emphasize competence, confidentiality, and clear communication. These obligations apply regardless of technology. AI does not reduce these responsibilities; if anything, it heightens the need for diligence and transparency.

The practical takeaway is straightforward: AI will continue to make certain legal services faster and more efficient and may reduce costs in some areas. It will not eliminate the need for experienced counsel. As tools become more powerful, sound judgment becomes even more critical. Most legal problems arise not from a lack of information but from misunderstandings, misaligned incentives, incomplete planning, and overlooked risk. AI can surface information quickly, but it cannot replace thoughtful analysis or strategic advice grounded in real-world business considerations.

AI should be viewed as a tool, not a substitute. Businesses that understand this distinction can set realistic expectations, ask the right questions, and work effectively with their advisors. The future of legal services is not automated law—it is informed law. Lawyers who use technology responsibly, verify outputs carefully, and remain accountable will continue to play a central role in helping businesses navigate growth, risk, and change.

Matthew Toma is an attorney with Kostopoulos Rodriguez, PLLC and may be reached a by email at Matthew@korolaw.com.