Elevating the value of questions in the age of AI

ELFA Legal forum 2025

Earlier this month, I had the opportunity to participate in a panel at the ELFA Legal Forum, where we explored the legal implications of artificial intelligence in equipment finance and beyond. The “Artificial Intelligence: Understanding and Working with the Ever Changing Operative and Legal Landscape” discussion underscored the importance of bridging innovation and regulation as AI continues to shape our industry and society. Unlike traditional panels, this session, led by Brittany Ogden, took a more interactive approach. We presented real-world scenarios and Brittany facilitated a dynamic dialogue between the technology perspective—my role—and the legal viewpoint, thoughtfully represented by Denise Field. This format sparked meaningful discussion on how both sides navigate the complexities of AI.

What really stood out was how much legal groundwork has already been laid, including active lawsuits, around AI. Denise shared seven categories of legal risk including data privacy, bias/discrimination, and liability – all with defining case studies and decisions already. The legal community is demonstrably well ahead of equipment finance leadership and operations with their engagement of and learning about AI. Many in the audience already have experience with AI in both the office and in court. I heard about one firm that’s already requiring the use of GenAI tools to draft documents early in case preparation due to customer demand. Apparently, some customers see GenAI as an efficiency-tool that can reduce costs and the firm’s partners are accommodating that perception.

The forum presentations referenced multiple AI uses in court – both good and bad – that clearly demonstrated how the practice of law is changing and adapting in the age AI. Denise’s presentation highlighted the “murky legal landscape” created by an absence of federal regulations and a patchwork of state regulations. One of the unfortunate uses described was a case where “a beautiful AI-prepared legal brief” had nine case citations - all of which were found in court to be AI hallucinations. The court’s disproval of such reckless uses has inspired firms to evaluate whether or not their opponents are using AI in the hope of undermining the opposition’s case. Misuse has apparently given AI a “cheating” brand in the eyes of many in the community – both attorneys and judges. I was asked about the building “an AI detector” during the panel discussion. My answer, of course, was “Yes, that can be done and it will be built with AI.”

One of the more interesting parts of Denise’s presentation revolved around the American Bar Association rules on competence in the practice of law. The interpretation in the context of AI was surprisingly technical in nature but common sense for anyone looking to apply AI in practice:

• Attorneys must either acquire a reasonable understanding of the benefits and risks of the technologies used to deliver legal services or utilize expertise of others who can provide guidance on GAI.
• Failure to independently verify output of AI may violate duty to provide competent representation.
• May not abdicate responsibility by solely relying on AI for exercise of professional judgment.

I left the forum with the impression that attorneys may actually be ahead of many in business when it comes to applying and managing emerging technologies like AI. The competitive nature of their profession drives them to try new methods aggressively and the critical reviews of both opposing counsel and the court help them learn quickly from mistakes. They are deeply accountable to their customers, their peers, and the court so they are rapidly creating guidelines to help them use AI to maximum advantage.

I found the forum to be naturally curious—they ask a lot of questions. That stood out to me, especially in light of a recent post by technology thought-leader Sanjeet Paul Choudary, who uses value chain analysis to help tech developers and business leaders understand how trends like AI shift the ways value is created and delivered. His insight that “When answers get cheap, good questions are the new scarcity” was on full display at the Legal Forum.