Handwritten court forms, exhibits, or correspondence can be hard to read. Either the penmanship is unclear (which can lead to interpretation and case-handling errors) or the recipient can’t read cursive. Signature moves: are we losing the ability to write by hand? Lucky for us, many AI tools can now look at a handwritten page and…
Tag: AI
AI-generated alt-text can be an image-captioning start. The legal writer will do more.
This colorful image was included in the State Appellate Defender Office’s brief recently filed with the Michigan Supreme Court in People v Soriano (Docket No. 167373). Disclaimer: I don’t know whether SADO used any AI tools as a resource when deciding how to caption this image in its brief. Even so, the image and SADO’s…
Testing Claude.ai to summarize a report and create a presentation deck
On August 1, 2025, the Michigan Supreme Court released to the public the 29-page Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission Equity Report – Phase II prepared by the National Center for State Courts. Using Claude.ai, I prompted the AI tool to: Review the attached study and using plain language: (1) list all findings, (2) list all recommendations,…
Citing trouble: The unpredictable cost of AI-made-up case names and summaries in court filings to self-represented persons or attorneys
How’d you react if you ordered a delightful gift from a “discount” website to be delivered to a good friend for their birthday…but they instead received a gift box filled with dirty, smelly rags (and your name on the gift note)? When a self-represented litigant or attorney asks AI (artificial intelligence) tools like ChatGPT, Claude,…
Google NotebookLM for pre-filing review in Michigan
NotebookLM can be an efficient and collaborative tool as the legal filer checks for proper document and citation formatting—a painstaking task often overlooked. Missing elements can result in a rejected filing or poorly reflect on the writer’s professional competency. For trial court filings, one can create a “Notebook” and upload MCR 1.109, the Michigan Appellate…
Images in legal writing? Include descriptive captions. AI can help.
A “captions” search of this website recalls earlier posts on why image captions play an important—but often overlooked—role in persuasive and informative legal writing. Three times, the State Appellate Defender Office included excellent descriptive image captions in its Application for Leave to Appeal in People v David Serges (167154). The Michigan Supreme Court recently ordered…
A new way to use audio files as an information resource using NotebookLM
Many probably know of NotebookLM as the AI collaborator where you can upload documents (“sources”) to a digital “notebook” and then ask questions about the information in your sources. NotebookLM responds with an answer and citations to the sources you’ve supplied. Since you control what NotebookLM focuses on, there’s less worry about made-up hallucinations. NotebookLM…
Four different prompts. Asking Claude.ai to help understand a divided appellate decision
Three justices wrote when the Michigan Supreme Court released Thursday’s 62-page decision in Shareef El-Jamaly v Kirco Manix Const (164902-4). Justice Welch penned the 32-page majority (joined by Justices Bernstein, Cavanagh, and Bolden). Chief Justice Clement filed a 3-page opinion that concurred and dissented in part. Justice Zahra authored a 27-page dissent (joined by Justice…
When 4 jurists write: Prompting Claude.ai to create tables of disagreement and agreement and asking follow-ups in the ex parte decision People v Loew (164133)
Four justices wrote when the Michigan Supreme Court released today’s 93-page decision in People v Loew (164133). Chief Justice Clement penned the 29-page lead majority (joined by Justices Zahra and Viviano). Justice Welch filed a 31-page opinion that concurred and dissented in part (joined by Justice Cavanagh). Justice Bolden wrote for herself in a 15-page…
Prompting Claude.ai to create tables of disagreement and agreement in the indigent/expert-witness decision People v Warner (163805)
A divided Michigan Supreme Court released its 39-page decision in People v Warner (163805) last Thursday. I deleted the Syllabus pages and put Claude.ai (a next-generation AI assistant) to work on the majority and dissenting opinions by creating tables showing the areas of disagreement and agreement. Here is the prompt: Create a three-column table that outlines the key…