Ropes & Gray is developing an AI tool with OpenAI for transactional diligence. An October 29 case study describes its workflow and lawyer review.
The big change
- Grouping related documents gives lawyers a structure to inspect.
- Comparisons with completed reports informed revisions; no quantitative performance results are reported.
- US ethics guidance ties verification to the tool and task.
From data room to lawyer review
OpenAI says initial development focuses on material commercial contracts. The tool inventories a data room, groups documents by theme and issue, and produces summaries and a report in the firm’s format. Lawyers can check groupings and summaries against source documents before delivery. Grouping related material helps reviewers consider a relationship across documents rather than relying on an isolated extract.
The firm’s September announcement set an hours-rather-than-weeks ambition. OpenAI says lawyers compared drafts with completed reports and refined the rubric; it reports no quantitative results.
A draft organizes information for review, but lawyers must assess the work and exercise judgment. BIG CHANGE did not test the tool or independently verify its outputs.
Professional duties
The American Bar Association’s Formal Opinion 512 discusses competence, confidentiality and supervision when lawyers use generative AI. It says independent verification depends on the tool and task. For example, the opinion says a lawyer might test summaries against a manually reviewed subset rather than read every contract, if that prior test gives a reasonable basis for reliance. The appropriate review depends on the circumstances. The opinion interprets US Model Rules; it does not establish compliance for this tool, and applicable rules vary by jurisdiction.
