Wednesday, 08 February 2023 07:30

Lawyers Beware: How ChatGPT is Revolutionizing Legal Analysis Featured

Rate this item
(0 votes)

LAWYER REVOLUTION IS HERE

That revolt is now. And, for now, it comes in the mind of the artificial intelligence multitalented, ChatGPT, part Columbo, part Perry Mason and part whatever you want it to be.

Think I'm waxing hyperbole? Well, check out the below and you tell me what you think:

I created a make-believe legal case in which the Jones family was seeking life insurance proceeds for the sudden unexplained death of Joseph, the husband and father of two children. Then, I solicited the assistance of a special prompt tool for ChatGTP, which I'm naming, Ms. Chatty. She's my attorney, investigator and legal advisor for what was a live experiment.

I presented her the made-up fact scenario. Before I could blink, she read and from there, I picked her mind. In total, our full chat took no more than ten minutes. I presented that conversation below. I annotated my thoughts with underscores. So, our chat started by my asking her:


What advice would you give to the Jones family who are seeking life insurance benefits for the death of Joseph Jones? They have sued the insurance company for denying coverage due to alleged suicide. Joseph Jones was an executive at a Grocery Exchange. He belonged to numerous civic and community organizations, played golf with his friends, went to the professional sports games and had a good relationship with his wife and his two children, both who were in high school. One day, his wife Alice came home and saw the gate in the back was left open which never occurred unless a family member was exiting the property. She walked through it and looked at the family pool and she saw her husband’s hat floating in the pool. She ran to the side of the pool and there floating was her husband Joseph. When the police came to investigate, they noticed that his car was parked in the garage, his bed was unmade and his gun was on the table. However, there were no fingerprints on the gun. Nor was there any evidence of a burglary or any other intrusion. Weeks after the funeral, she and her family tried to obtain Joseph’s life insurance, but the insurer denied the claim, claiming Joseph had committed suicide. The insurance company claimed that he left a Facebook post telling the world that he was upset that he was not moving up in his job and seemed despondent. They also claimed he was seeing a psychiatrist for depression which nobody knew anything about, even his family. The treating psychiatrist claimed they did discuss possible suicide thoughts but those discussions were almost six months before his death. The insurance company also discovered that he had an extramarital affair that had just ended the week prior to the death and that it had ended with his feelings getting hurt.
Ms. Chatty: What type of life insurance policy did Joseph Jones have?

ME: He had whole life insurance with a death benefit of one million dollars. His wife and children were all named beneficiaries.

Ms. Chatty: Was there a suicide clause in the life insurance policy that Joseph Jones had taken?

ME: Yes

Ms. Chatty: I advise that the Jones family seek the assistance of a life insurance attorney. The insurance company is alleging that Joseph's death was a suicide and denying the claim based on the suicide clause in the policy. However, there is no concrete evidence of suicide and the family has the right to contest the denial of the claim. A life insurance attorney can review the policy, gather evidence and represent the family in negotiations with the insurance company or in court if necessary.

For starts, other than the incredible speed of her response, her advice was somewhat obvious. No great insight, although, I must admit, I did not consider a "life insurance" attorney. Thus, I dug deeper wanting to get more meat.

lawyer discover                                                                                      Click and watch the video                           

ME: What is the strongest part of the insurance company's case based upon these facts? After my question, I thought she's going to get annoyed and would respond with something like, "go hire an attorney, ok?".

Ms. Chatty: Based on the facts provided, it appears that the insurance company's strongest argument is the Facebook post indicating that Joseph was upset about his job and the fact that he was seeing a psychiatrist for depression. Additionally, the insurance company has evidence of Joseph's extramarital affair ending just prior to his death, which may support the suggestion of suicide. These factors, combined with the lack of concrete evidence of foul play, give the insurance company a strong case for denying the claim based on the suicide clause in the policy.

It took Ms. Chatty no more than a few seconds to review the facts and spit out her analysis and I agree with her pinpointing the insurance company's salient argument. So, as attorneys are trained to be able to argue both sides of the case, I asked further

ME: What is the strongest part of the Jones family case based upon these facts?

Ms. Chatty: Based on the facts provided, the Jones family's strongest argument is the lack of concrete evidence of suicide. The absence of fingerprints on the gun and the unmade bed suggest that Joseph may not have taken his own life. Additionally, the fact that his wife was unaware of his depression and the treating psychiatrist only discussed suicide thoughts with him six months prior to his death, casts doubt on the insurance company's claims. The Jones family can argue that these factors, combined with the strong relationship Joseph had with his family, suggest that his death was not a suicide.

Whew!! Her response exceeded warp speed of mental agility. But, I did wonder why she felt "the absence of fingerprints on the gun and the unmade bed suggest that Joseph may not have taken his own life". I assume she concluded that the lack of fingerprints on the gun suggests that perhaps an intruder wiped the gun.

ME: Is there an expert witness that the insurance company could utilize to bolster its case?

MS. CHATTY: The insurance company could potentially use the treating psychiatrist as an expert witness to support their case. The psychiatrist could provide testimony about Joseph's reported depression and any discussions they had with him about possible suicide thoughts. Additionally, the insurance company could use a forensic expert to analyze the physical evidence, such as the gun and the lack of fingerprints, and provide testimony about the likelihood of suicide based on that evidence. These expert witnesses could bolster the insurance company's case by supporting their claims about Joseph's mental state and the circumstances surrounding his death.

Again, this took all but maybe ten seconds for her to analyze and to write although suggestions are kind of obvious--forensic, gun, fingerprints, treating physician as a fact-expert witness. No great revelation, but the quickness of her analysis was mind-boggling, at least to me.

ME: Is there an expert witness that the Jones family should consider?

MS. CHATTY: The Jones family should consider hiring a forensic expert as an expert witness to dispute the insurance company's claims about the physical evidence. The expert could analyze the evidence, such as the gun and the lack of fingerprints, and provide testimony about the likelihood of suicide based on that evidence. The Jones family may also want to consider hiring a mental health expert to dispute the insurance company's claims about Joseph's depression and the likelihood of suicide based on his mental state. This expert could provide an alternate explanation for the circumstances surrounding Joseph's death and cast doubt on the insurance company's claims. Hiring these expert witnesses could help to strengthen the Jones family's case and dispute the insurance company's claims.

While her response was somewhat generic, it still provided information and analysis useful for discovery. Interestingly, it also indicates that Ms.Chatty at this point believes the two main witnesses would be psychiatrist to speak to the likelihood of suicide and the physical evidence that might or might not prove one side or the other. I decided to test her on what might be the most important part of the case.

Me: If the case were to go to trial, what type of jury should the Jones family seek? What personal or societal traits?

MS. CHATTY: If the case were to go to trial, the Jones family would want to seek a jury that is sympathetic to their situation. The following personal and societal traits could be favorable for the Jones family:

Jurors with personal experience with depression or mental illness, as they may be more understanding of the lack of concrete evidence of suicide and the insurance company's claims about Joseph's mental state.

Jurors who have been affected by life insurance disputes, as they may understand the importance of the life insurance benefits for the Jones family.

Jurors who are skeptical of insurance companies, as they may be more likely to question the insurance company's claims and believe the Jones family's arguments.

Jurors who are married or have children, as they may be more likely to relate to the Jones family's situation and be sympathetic to the impact Joseph's death has had on his wife and children.

It's important to note that jury selection can be a complex process and that many other factors, such as the specific laws in the jurisdiction and the judge's rulings, can also have a significant impact on the outcome of the case.
ME: What type of juror do you think the insurance company would seek?

Ms. Chatty: The insurance company would likely seek a jury that is more favorable to their position. The following personal and societal traits could be favorable for the insurance company:

Jurors who are familiar with the insurance industry and its policies, as they may be more likely to understand the insurance company's arguments and find them persuasive.

Jurors who are more skeptical of claims of suicide, as they may be more likely to believe the insurance company's claims about the circumstances surrounding Joseph's death.

Jurors who have a strong belief in personal responsibility, as they may view Joseph's death as being his own responsibility and not that of the insurance company.

Jurors who are less sympathetic to extramarital affairs, as they may view the recent extramarital affair as a negative aspect of Joseph's character that could make them less likely to support the Jones family's case.

It's important to note that jury selection can be a complex process and that many other factors, such as the specific laws in the jurisdiction and the judge's rulings, can also have a significant impact on the outcome of the case.
I decided to circle back and ask this next question because I am not sure if the evidence supports her conclusion. Remember, while Ms. Chatty is a genius and can digest complicated facts and respond cogently, faster than anybody I have ever seen, she is giving advice which one can accept or reject. And like any human, er, I mean, AI whatever it is, she can be wrong.

ME: You said that "The absence of fingerprints on the gun and the unmade bed suggest that Joseph may not have taken his own life." Why would that evidence not suggest suicide?

Ms. Chatty: The absence of fingerprints on the gun and an unmade bed suggest that Joseph may not have taken his own life, because it could indicate that another person was involved in the incident [1]. This could be an important consideration in determining the cause of death, as suicide is often preceded by warning signs such as a personal crisis or life stress, loss of social support, and exposure to suicidal behavior [3]. The absence of these signs and the absence of fingerprints on the gun could indicate that Joseph's death may have been due to another cause, rather than suicide.

For this query, I used special technology that combined the ChatGPT with the live Internet. This explains the hyperlinks above.

In conclusion, the question whether an exercise as such is worth the time is one that each person can judge on their own. I found it incredibly useful. While my own analysis of all the facts might have drawn the some of the same conclusions, it surely would have taken me quite longer. Also, I could have gone on for ever peppering her with followup questions enabling me to hone in on so many more specifics.

For me, the value of my chat with ChatGTP's Ms. Chatty comes down to my ability to bounce ideas and information off of what I consider to be a genius, albeit, one that can be simplistic and certainly wrong at times. And she surely would be cheaper, be more available and quicker than if I were have hired an investigator and perhaps a lawyer for this case and perhaps for others.

Read 2149 times Last modified on Wednesday, 08 February 2023 21:08