AI ethics guide · Pennsylvania
Can a Pennsylvania lawyer put client documents into an AI tool?
What Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200 says about client confidentiality, and the other duties that come with using AI.
Not legal advice. This is a plain-English summary of Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200, written by the team that makes ClientSafeAI, and it hasn't been reviewed by a lawyer. Read the source itself, and ask the Pennsylvania bar's ethics hotline if you're unsure how it applies to you.
| Document | Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200, Ethical Issues Regarding the Use of Artificial Intelligence |
|---|---|
| Issued by | Pennsylvania Bar Association Committee on Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility, and Philadelphia Bar Association Professional Guidance Committee |
| Date | June 2024 |
| Status | Advisory joint ethics opinion |
The short answer
Yes, as long as you safeguard the confidential information the AI system handles and tell clients how you use AI where it could affect their matter. Pennsylvania’s joint opinion treats AI as another technology that lawyers must use competently, like legal research databases or e-discovery.
What it says about confidentiality
The Pennsylvania and Philadelphia bars issued this opinion jointly, so it carries the weight of both. It doesn’t invent new duties. It applies the existing Rules to AI, and safeguarding confidential client information the AI system handles is one of the core obligations it lists.
In practice that means knowing where information goes when you use a tool, and what the vendor may do with it, before client material goes in. The opinion pairs this with a duty to communicate with clients about AI use and its potential effect on their matter.
It also expects lawyers to watch for AI-related conflicts of interest and to keep current through CLE and training, because the tools and the risks change quickly.
Attorneys are required to maintain competence across all technological means relevant to their practice.
Pennsylvania/Philadelphia Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200
The other duties it covers
| Accuracy | AI-generated content must be truthful, accurate and soundly reasoned. Verify every citation an AI suggests before using it. |
|---|---|
| Fees and costs | AI-related expenses must be reasonable and disclosed to the client. |
| Training | Pursue CLE and training to stay current on AI ethics and practice. |
In practice
- Know where client information goes in every AI tool you use, before you use it.
- Tell clients about AI use that could affect their matter.
- Disclose AI-related costs, and keep them reasonable.
- Keep up with CLE on AI. The opinion lists it as an obligation, not a nice-to-have.
Worth watching
The official copy on pabar.org didn’t load when we checked, so the link above is a copy hosted by LawSites. Check the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s site for the authoritative version.
How this compares with ABA Formal Opinion 512
The ABA's national opinion requires a client's informed consent before information relating to the representation goes into a self-learning AI tool, and says boilerplate consent in an engagement letter isn't enough. Read the Opinion 512 summary and firm checklist.
Keep client documents on a server that’s only yours
A Private AI Workspace runs on a GPU server ordered for one firm. Your documents, the AI model and the database stay on it, it never trains on your files, and answers cite the page they came from. It costs $499 a month, flat.
Sources
Spotted something out of date? Tell us and we'll fix it.
Not legal advice. This is a plain-English summary of Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200, written by the team that makes ClientSafeAI, and it hasn't been reviewed by a lawyer. Read the source itself, and ask the Pennsylvania bar's ethics hotline if you're unsure how it applies to you.