Reference 01
Professional responsibility stays with the lawyer.
Under Seal can enforce workflow controls. It cannot transfer competence, supervision, judgment, candor, or client duties from the firm to software.
Authority review: August 12, 2026. State rules, local rules, contracts, and matter facts still require firm-specific review.
Important boundary
Under Seal is software, not a law firm, auditor, records custodian, or compliance certification. Local deployment reduces particular disclosure and vendor-access risks. It does not by itself satisfy professional-conduct rules, HIPAA, state privacy law, trust-account rules, discovery duties, court orders, or a firm's own policies.
| Duty | Failure mode | Product control | Firm responsibility |
|---|---|---|---|
| Competence | Using an AI capability without understanding its limits or checking the result. | Visible source pins, abstention, versioned receipts, documented model and evaluation state. | Train users, choose appropriate matters, review outputs, and keep current with the governing jurisdiction. |
| Confidentiality | Unauthorized disclosure through hosted inference, telemetry, support, backups, or document sync. | Loopback-only inference, local matter store, no product telemetry, and redacted support artifacts by design. | Approve the deployment, identities, storage, backups, support channel, retention, and client-consent analysis. |
| Communication | A client does not understand a material use of AI or its effect on representation. | Deployment and review records make use discoverable to the firm. | Decide when disclosure or informed consent is required and document it in the matter. |
| Supervision | AI output is treated as a lawyer or allowed to commit consequential work. | Models propose. Deterministic gates and named reviewers control matter-file entry and export. | Assign accountable lawyers, supervise staff, and review every consequential work product. |
| Candor and accuracy | False facts, citations, quotations, or authority reach a tribunal or third party. | Citation existence checks, quote pins, coverage states, refusal paths, and export blocks. | Verify law, facts, quotations, local rules, negative treatment, and the final filing independently. |
| Fees | Efficiency becomes inflated time or an undisclosed technology charge. | No time-capture or billing workflow is part of the current chronology pilot. | Apply the engagement agreement and jurisdictional reasonableness rules; bill actual time where required. |
| Safekeeping property | A trust transaction violates a jurisdiction's accounting or recordkeeping requirements. | No trust-accounting workflow is part of the current chronology pilot. | Use the firm's approved trust systems and jurisdiction-specific controls. Under Seal is not a trust-account certification. |
Jurisdiction gate before use
- 01Identify every state bar and tribunal governing the matter.
- 02Check current AI guidance, local rules, standing orders, protective orders, and engagement terms.
- 03Decide whether client disclosure or informed consent is required.
- 04Document approved use cases, prohibited data, reviewer identity, and the final authority check.
- 05Keep trust accounting and deadline calculation outside this pilot and in the firm's approved systems.
- 06Re-review after any model, workflow, court-rule, or professional-conduct change.
Authorities
American Bar Association
Formal Opinion 512: Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools
Competence, confidentiality, communication, supervision, candor, and reasonable fees when lawyers use generative AI.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.American Bar Association
Model Rule 1.1 and Comment 8: Competence
Lawyers should understand the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.American Bar Association
Model Rule 1.4: Communications
Requires consultation and information sufficient for clients to make informed decisions about the representation.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.American Bar Association
Model Rule 1.5: Fees
Addresses reasonable fees and communication of the scope and basis of charges.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.American Bar Association
Model Rule 1.6: Confidentiality of Information
Protects information relating to a representation and requires reasonable precautions against unauthorized access or disclosure.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.American Bar Association
Model Rule 1.15: Safekeeping Property
Requires separation, safeguarding, accounting, and retention of client and third-party property records.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.American Bar Association
Model Rule 3.3: Candor Toward the Tribunal
Makes the lawyer responsible for the truthfulness of representations to a tribunal.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.American Bar Association
Model Rule 5.3: Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistance
Requires reasonable supervisory measures for nonlawyer assistance, including technology-enabled assistance.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.American Bar Association
Model Rule 5.1: Responsibilities of Partners, Managers, and Supervisory Lawyers
Requires reasonable supervisory and firm-level measures for lawyers' compliance with professional duties.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.State Bar of California
Practical Guidance for the Use of Generative AI in the Practice of Law
State-specific guidance on confidentiality, competence, diligence, supervision, candor, fees, and discrimination.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.The Florida Bar
Ethics Opinion 24-1
Addresses generative AI confidentiality, accuracy, billing, supervision, and lawyer-advertising duties.
Opens the issuing source in a new tab.