BY EDWARD McINTYRE
ETHICS
E
Could a Robot Do This? No, legal ethics involves moral judgment
M
acbeth and his team had just finished their monthly Professional Responsibility Roundtable when Rugger rushed to the speakers’ table.
on about. Here’s my brainstorm. Ready? Use AI!” Grinning from ear to ear, Rugger waived his arms like a maestro concluding a grand symphony.
“Hey Macbeth!”
“You know. All that AI you’ve talked about. How it will revolutionize law practice. Well, what about — Robo-Ethics!”
“Yes, Bill. Have a question?” “Better. I’ve got a revolution. Brilliant, if I say so myself.” “I’m sure, Bill. Duncan, Sarah, gather ‘round and listen to Bill.” Duncan and Sarah pulled their chairs close. “Go ahead, Bill, floor’s yours.” “Well, you know these ethics rules you’re always talking about —”
“Use artificial intelligence for what, Bill?”
“Robo-Ethics? What pray tell —” “Load in all the rules. Case authority. Opinions. Whatever. Then, you got an ethics question? Bingo. Answer in milliseconds. Nothing to discuss. Nothing to debate. Question — answer. Next question. Might put a few of you ethics nerds out of business but — hey, stuff happens.”
“Rules of Professional Conduct and the State Bar Act?”
“Indeed, it does. Let me see if I understand.”
“Yeah, them. And the ABA stuff —”
“Would you propose Robo-Ethics for civil lawsuits and State Bar Court discipline cases?”
“ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct?”
CARTOON BY GEORGE BREWSTER JR.
“Whatever. And cases and opinions you go
“Sure. Ask away.”
“Sure, why not?” “As you would have it, if facts might support the violation of a rule. Or a provision of the State Bar Act. Then, Robo-Ethics would match the facts with the rule, find the violation? Add the cases for support? All in the blink of an eye.” “You got it. That’s the beauty of it. None of this ‘but if … but if’ back-and-forth.” “What about experience? What about moral judgment? Where do they fit in?” “What do you mean?” “I’m reminded of Holmes statement, ‘The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.’” “That was then. This is the digital age.” “I see. May I test Robo-Ethics a bit?” “Be my guest.” “Assume a lawyer’s client trust account falls to $990 when he should have $1,000 of a client’s funds in the account. If the client asked for her money, it’s not all there. Clear indication of a Rule 4-100 violation, wouldn’t you say?” “Seems like.” “Robo-Ethics would find a violation, I assume?” “Clearly.” “If it were a civil case, Robo-Ethics would find liability. Say, breach of fiduciary duty.” “Sounds right.” “If it were a discipline case, Robo-Ethics would find culpability. Then look at the Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, I assume.” “Yep. That’s what you say the State Bar Court applies. ” “It does. Supreme Court as well. Standard 2.2(a) calls for a three-month actual suspension from practice for trust account comingling or failure to pay out entrusted May/June 2018 SAN DIEGO LAWYER 15