Since the public debut of generative artificial intelligence (AI) about 18 months ago, proponents and detractors of the new technology have saturated the media with breathless commentaries about the promise and peril of this new technology in the legal profession. On the one hand, a reported 44% of all legal tasks could be replaced by generative AI, while on the other hand, generative AI 'hallucinates' and makes up fake but convincing-sounding case citations, leading to lawyers being sanctioned. So, which is it? 

And importantly, how should lawyers navigate this new landscape? Shun AI and risk falling behind the competition? Or embrace it and get too far out over your skis? 

This choice raises both practical and ethical questions. While the practicalities are still a work in progress - as new use cases and applications are hitting the market every day - the ethical questions are beginning to take shape. Lawyers should be aware of how to use generative AI tools responsibly and ethically, maintaining compliance with professional rules of conduct as required by their respective state bars. Several state bar associations have now issued guidance. Dr. Christian Mammen, Vincent Look, and Dr. Seiko Okada, of Womble Bond Dickinson, discuss this guidance and how the practice of law may evolve with the increasing use of generative AI.  

New Jersey became the 13th state to enact comprehensive privacy legislation when Governor Murphy signed S332 into law on January 16, 2024. The New Jersey Data Protection Act (NJDPA) is designed to protect the personal data of New Jersey residents and imposes various obligations and requirements on persons and entities that are deemed to be 'controllers' (i.e., who alone or jointly determine the purpose and means of processing a consumer's personal data) or 'processors' (i.e., who process personal data on behalf of the controller). The NJDPA will become effective and enforceable on January 15, 2025. Although the NJDPA shares many similarities with other comprehensive state privacy laws - like the Colorado Privacy Act and the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act - there are significant differences that businesses must consider to ensure they comply with the unique requirements of the laws of each state that may apply to business operations. John T. Wolak, Partner at Gibbons P.C., covers the main provisions that businesses should consider to ensure compliance with the NJPDA.