Artificial intelligence is no longer a futuristic concept for the legal profession—it is already reshaping how attorneys, judges, and clients interact with the justice system. A new study conducted by Anidjar & Levine reveals that AI adoption in law firms and courtrooms is accelerating at a pace few anticipated, with efficiency gains driving uptake even as concerns about accuracy and ethics remain unresolved.

Adoption Trends: A Profession in Transition

The study highlights that nearly 70% of law firms have already integrated at least one form of AI technology into their operations. Document review, legal research, and drafting support dominate the landscape, with 74% of lawyers expected to rely on AI for document review by 2025.

  • Document Review: 74% (2024) → 77% (2025)

  • Legal Research: 73% (2024) → 74% (2025)

  • Contract Drafting: 51% (2024) → 58% (2025)

These figures underscore a profession in transition. What was once a niche tool is now becoming a baseline expectation for competitive practice.

Efficiency Gains: The Driving Force

The most compelling reason for adoption is efficiency. According to the study, 54.4% of legal professionals cite time savings as the top advantage of AI tools. By automating repetitive tasks such as contract review and memo drafting, firms can redirect resources toward higher-value strategic work.

Examples include:

  • Faster case preparation: AI-assisted research reduces hours of manual review.

  • Streamlined discovery: Algorithms can sift through terabytes of data in seconds.

  • Client service improvements: Quicker turnaround times enhance client satisfaction.

Accuracy and Reliability: The Achilles' Heel

Despite the enthusiasm, the study reveals deep unease about accuracy. 74.7% of legal professionals rank accuracy as their top concern, with “hallucination” risks—where AI generates false or fabricated information—posing a serious threat.

  • Westlaw AI: 34% hallucination rate in tests.

  • Lexis+ AI: 17% error rate even with advanced safeguards.

Real-world consequences have already emerged. Attorneys in New York and elsewhere have faced sanctions for submitting AI-generated briefs containing fictitious case law.

Judicial Oversight and Regulation

The judiciary is responding. By mid-2025, over 40 federal judges required disclosure of AI use in filings, up from 25 just a year earlier. State bar associations in California, New York, and Florida have also issued guidance mandating attorney supervision of AI-generated work.

Meanwhile, at least eight U.S. states are drafting or enacting legislation to regulate AI in legal services, with a focus on malpractice liability and consumer protection.

Public Perception: A Generational Divide

The study also reveals a striking generational divide in client expectations:

  • 68% of clients under 45 expect their lawyers to use AI tools.

  • Only 39% of lawyers believe AI improves client outcomes.

This gap suggests that firms slow to adopt AI may risk losing younger, tech-savvy clients, even as older attorneys remain cautious.

Conclusion

The Anidjar & Levine study paints a picture of a profession at a crossroads. AI is delivering undeniable efficiency gains, but accuracy concerns and ethical dilemmas remain unresolved. The next few years will determine whether AI becomes a trusted partner in the courtroom—or a liability that undermines public trust in the justice system.