Compliance Stuff

The Texas Business Court has entered the growing national debate about whether conversations with AI tools like ChatGPT are discoverable, and it came down on the side of protection. In a minute entry filed June 3, 2026, Judge Grant Dorfman of the Eleventh Division ruled that a non-lawyer’s ChatGPT conversations, prepared in anticipation of litigation, can qualify as protected attorney work product under Texas procedural rules. The ruling came in Tate Group Automotive, LLC v. Legacy Automotive Capital, LLC , Cause No. 25-BC11B-0020, after the Court completed an in camera review of ChatGPT “conversations” that the plaintiff had withheld from production. The decision continues the developing judicial dialogue on AI discoverability, siding with two federal courts that have found no waiver and expressly splitting from another federal court that reached the opposite conclusion. In doing so, the Court rejected the argument that a non-lawyer’s sharing of information with ChatGPT necessarily wa...

If you or your employees use ChatGPT or other generative artificial intelligence to help during a lawsuit, a re the AI chat histories and other archived data fair game during discovery, or are they protected by the attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine? As the use of GenAI tools expands into business operations and transforms employment litigation, more courts are beginning to address this critical question. We’ll cover two recent federal court decisions that reached nearly opposite conclusions and offer five practical takeaways for employers. Quick Background During the discovery phase of a lawsuit, the parties are required to collect and exchange evidence, including electronically stored information (ESI) to understand the facts of the case. However, discovery requests are limited by relevance, proportionality, and other rules, and certain materials and communications are protected. For example: The  attorney-client privilege  shields certain communications fro...

As Illinois employers that use AI in employment decisions ready themselves for the new anti-discrimination, notice, and record-keeping requirements starting January 1, the Illinois Department of Human Rights is in the process of drafting the long-anticipated rules for compliance. Indeed, the Illinois Department of Human Rights (IDHR) recently met with stakeholders to propose rules to implement the new law. How will this big change impact your workplace? Here’s what you need to know about the state’s new employment-related AI law, the proposed rule, and the five steps you can take now to prepare. Quick Review of New Illinois AI Obligations Under the new law, employers will need to provide notice to applicants and workers if they use artificial intelligence for hiring, discipline, discharge, or other workplace-related purposes. Employers are also prohibited from using AI in ways that result in workplace discrimination.​ The act includes a broad definition of AI and covers a variety of ...

  What if your most sensitive legal strategy or personal dilemma—typed into an AI chatbot—could be just one Google search away from public view or subpoena in court? As artificial intelligence seamlessly permeates the legal sector, the question of digital confidentiality has become more than hypothetical—it is a live and pressing concern. In the rapidly advancing realm of artificial intelligence, the legal sector faces a profound challenge. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, has illuminated a critical issue with significant implications for attorneys and corporate legal departments. During an interview, Altman candidly revealed that interactions with ChatGPT, OpenAI’s AI chatbot, lack the confidentiality protections inherent in traditional attorney-client discussions. This disclosure has echoed within boardrooms and regulatory bodies worldwide, prompting a reevaluation of how AI-driven tools are integrated into legal expertise. While AI offers transformative potential through efficiency ...

While artificial intelligence (AI) can be a powerful tool in a manager’s arsenal when it comes to efficiently making decisions, it is essential to use it ethically and fairly. Companies are no longer relying on AI solely to automate repetitive tasks or produce predictive analytics —  recent studies  have shown that over 60% of managers use AI for critical employment decisions, such as hiring, firing, layoffs, and/or promotions. And more than one in five managers use AI to make these decisions without any human input. As managers increasingly — and often blindly — rely upon AI, companies may risk significant legal exposure. Although it may be tempting to use AI to streamline employment decisions (e.g., hiring, promotion, workforce reductions), it is critical to remember that AI output merely reflects the data the system receives. These systems have no measurement for context, lack human judgment and empathy, and risk producing outcomes with unintended disparate impacts. A Cauti...

  What if your most sensitive legal strategy or personal dilemma—typed into an AI chatbot—could be just one Google search away from public view or subpoena in court? As artificial intelligence seamlessly permeates the legal sector, t he question of digital confidentiality has become more than hypothetical—it is a live and pressing concern. In the rapidly advancing realm of artificial intelligence, the legal sector faces a profound challenge. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, has illuminated a critical issue with significant implications for attorneys and corporate legal departments. During an interview, Altman candidly revealed that interactions with ChatGPT, OpenAI’s AI chatbot, lack the confidentiality protections inherent in traditional attorney-client discussions. This disclosure has echoed within boardrooms and regulatory bodies worldwide, prompting a reevaluation of how AI-driven tools are integrated into legal expertise. While AI offers transformative potential through efficiency ...