Texas Opinion 705
The definitive guide to understanding and implementing Texas's groundbreaking AI ethics opinion. Every Texas lawyer using AI tools must understand these requirements to practice ethically and avoid sanctions.
What is Texas Opinion 705?
🏛️ The Foundation
Texas Professional Ethics Committee Opinion 705, issued in March 2024, provides the first comprehensive ethical guidance for lawyers using artificial intelligence in their practice. This opinion establishes binding ethical obligations for all Texas attorneys using AI tools.
📜 Legal Authority
- Binding ethical guidance for Texas lawyers
- Based on existing Rules of Professional Conduct
- Applies to ALL forms of AI use in legal practice
- Violations can result in disciplinary action
🎯 Scope of Application
- Document drafting and review
- Legal research and analysis
- Case strategy development
- Client communication assistance
- Administrative and billing tasks
⚖️ Core Principle
- AI is a tool, not a substitute for lawyer judgment
- Lawyers remain fully responsible for AI output
- Human supervision is always required
- Client interests must be protected at all times
Core Ethical Requirements
🧠 Competence (Rule 1.01)
- Understand the AI tool: Know how it works, its capabilities, and limitations
- Technical competence: Understand the technology sufficiently to use it effectively
- Ongoing education: Stay current with AI developments affecting legal practice
- Tool evaluation: Regularly assess whether AI tools remain appropriate for your use
👁️ Supervision (Rule 5.01)
- Direct oversight: Personally review all AI-generated work product
- Independent judgment: Make your own legal determinations
- Fact verification: Confirm accuracy of AI-provided information
- Quality control: Ensure work meets professional standards
🔒 Confidentiality (Rule 1.05)
- Data protection: Ensure client information remains confidential
- Vendor vetting: Evaluate AI provider security measures
- Access controls: Limit who can access client data through AI
- Breach protocols: Have procedures for data security incidents
💰 Reasonable Fees (Rule 1.04)
- Billing transparency: Disclose AI use in billing practices
- Time accuracy: Don't inflate time for AI-assisted work
- Value delivery: Ensure fees reflect actual value provided
- Cost efficiency: Pass efficiency benefits to clients when appropriate
Disclosure Requirements
⚠️ Key Point
Texas Opinion 705 does NOT require automatic disclosure of AI use to clients. However, disclosure may be required in specific circumstances or by client agreement.
When Disclosure is Required
✅ Mandatory Disclosure Situations
- Client requests information: If client asks about your methods or tools
- Material AI reliance: When AI substantially affects case strategy or outcomes
- Billing questions: If client questions efficiency or time savings
- Risk of harm: When AI limitations could negatively impact representation
- Professional judgment: When reasonable lawyer would disclose under circumstances
📋 Sample Disclosure Language
📄 Engagement Letter Addition
✅ Texas Opinion 705 Compliance Checklist
Use this checklist to ensure your AI use complies with Texas ethical requirements:
Competence Assessment
Document your understanding of each AI tool's capabilities, limitations, and appropriate use cases for legal work.
Supervision Protocols
Establish written procedures for reviewing and verifying all AI-generated work before use in client matters.
Confidentiality Safeguards
Review AI vendor contracts, security measures, and data handling practices to protect client confidentiality.
Billing Transparency
Update billing practices to accurately reflect AI-assisted work and ensure fair fee calculation.
Disclosure Policies
Develop guidelines for when and how to disclose AI use to clients based on specific circumstances.
Staff Training
Train all staff members who use AI tools on ethical obligations and proper procedures.
Documentation System
Create systems to document AI use, review processes, and decision-making for client files.
Regular Review
Schedule periodic reviews of AI tools, vendors, and compliance procedures to ensure ongoing adherence.
Step-by-Step Implementation
Audit Current AI Use
Inventory all AI tools currently used in your practice:
- ChatGPT, Claude, or other language models
- Legal research platforms with AI features
- Document review and e-discovery tools
- Practice management software with AI
- Billing or time tracking AI features
Evaluate Tool Competence
For each AI tool, document:
- How the technology works (basic understanding)
- Specific capabilities and limitations
- Appropriate and inappropriate use cases
- Known accuracy rates and error types
- Updates to your technical knowledge needs
Establish Supervision Procedures
Create written protocols for:
- Who can use which AI tools
- Required review processes for AI output
- Fact-checking and verification requirements
- Documentation of AI use in client files
- Quality control standards and metrics
Secure Client Confidentiality
Implement confidentiality protections:
- Review and update vendor agreements
- Evaluate data security and storage practices
- Implement access controls and user permissions
- Create incident response procedures
- Train staff on confidentiality requirements
Update Billing and Fee Practices
Modify billing practices to address:
- Accurate time recording for AI-assisted work
- Fair fee calculation reflecting AI efficiency
- Transparent billing descriptions
- Value-based fee discussions with clients
- Cost savings pass-through considerations
Develop Disclosure Framework
Create guidelines for disclosure decisions:
- Standard engagement letter language
- Criteria for mandatory disclosure situations
- Template disclosure language for different scenarios
- Client communication strategies
- Documentation of disclosure decisions
Practical Examples for PI Practice
✅ Compliant AI Use
- Medical record summary: AI drafts summary, lawyer reviews for accuracy and legal significance
- Discovery responses: AI helps draft responses, lawyer verifies facts and legal conclusions
- Demand letters: AI assists with initial draft, lawyer customizes and reviews legal strategy
- Research assistance: AI finds relevant cases, lawyer analyzes applicability and precedent
❌ Non-Compliant AI Use
- Unreviewed filings: Filing AI-generated pleadings without lawyer review
- Unsupervised research: Relying on AI case citations without verification
- Confidentiality breaches: Inputting privileged information into unsecured AI tools
- Misrepresented billing: Charging full research time for AI-assisted work
Common Compliance Mistakes
🚨 Most Frequent Violations
Based on early disciplinary actions and malpractice claims, these are the most common mistakes Texas lawyers make with AI:
⚠️ Inadequate Supervision
- Filing documents without reviewing AI-generated content
- Failing to fact-check AI research and citations
- Not understanding AI tool limitations
- Delegating AI oversight to non-lawyers
⚠️ Confidentiality Lapses
- Using public AI tools for sensitive client information
- Inadequate vendor due diligence
- Poor access controls and data management
- Lack of incident response procedures
⚠️ Billing Issues
- Billing full time for AI-assisted tasks
- Not disclosing efficiency gains to clients
- Vague or misleading time entries
- Failing to adjust fees for AI advantages
⚠️ Competence Gaps
- Using AI tools without understanding capabilities
- Failing to stay current with AI developments
- Not training staff on proper AI use
- Inadequate quality control measures
🎯 Ready to Implement Texas Opinion 705?
Download our comprehensive compliance toolkit including checklists, templates, and step-by-step implementation guides specifically designed for personal injury practices.
Download Free Texas 705 Compliance KitNeed Help with AI Compliance?
Every Texas law firm's AI compliance needs are different. Get personalized guidance for your specific practice and AI tools.