AI meeting notes for lawyers: what to check first

The answers depend more on the tool's data flow than on its features, and they are easier to settle once, in writing, than call by call.

This guide goes through those questions, points to the professional guidance that exists, and describes what one kind of tool — a recorder that transcribes on your own computer — changes and does not change.

What professional guidance says

In the United States, the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility issued Formal Opinion 512, "Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools" on 29 July 2024. It discusses how the Model Rules on competence, confidentiality, communication with clients, supervision and fees apply when lawyers use generative AI. It does not ban the tools. It expects lawyers to understand what a tool does with the information given to it, and it discusses when a lawyer should tell a client, or get the client's informed consent, before client information goes into one.

Many state bars and other countries' regulators have published their own guidance, and it is not all the same. Read the guidance that applies to you, not a summary of someone else's. Guidance in this area is still being written; check the date on whatever you rely on.

The four questions

1. Where does the conversation go?

List every place the audio, the transcript and any AI summary travel. For a typical cloud notetaker that can include:

• the vendor's bot or app that captures the meeting;
• a speech-to-text provider that receives the audio;
• a language-model provider that receives the transcript;
• the vendor's storage, and its backups;
• your own device and your firm's document system.

Each entry is a third party that holds client confidences, under its own terms and in its own country. Where does meeting audio go? turns this into questions you can send a vendor, with the answers you should expect to get in writing.

2. Does third-party processing affect confidentiality or privilege?

Privilege and the duty of confidentiality are different things, and a third party's involvement can raise questions about both. Whether using a particular service affects privilege is a question of law in your jurisdiction, on your facts. It is not something a vendor can answer for you, and this guide does not try. AI notetakers and attorney–client privilege lists the questions worth taking to counsel.

What you can control is the number of parties involved. Fewer processors means fewer contracts to review, fewer places a subpoena or a breach can reach, and a shorter explanation to the client.

3. What do you tell the client, and when?

At minimum, tell the client you are recording, at the start of the meeting, and what happens to the recording. Recording law applies to lawyers like anyone else: in some places everyone on a call must agree to it being recorded. How to ask for consent to record has wording.

Beyond recording, your regulator's guidance may expect you to explain your use of AI tools, particularly where client information is sent to a third-party model. A line in your engagement letter covers the general case: how meetings are recorded, where transcripts are made, whether any AI service receives them and on what terms, and how long each is kept.

4. How long is it kept, and who can find it?

Decide retention for each kind of record:

• Audio. Often the shortest period — long enough to check the transcript. A recording of a client's own words can be more sensitive than your note of them.
• Transcripts. Treat like attendance notes; your firm's records policy may already cover them.
• AI summaries. Treat as drafts until you have checked them. A summary that says a client agreed to something they did not is a problem in a file.

Also consider disclosure. If recordings and transcripts exist, they may be discoverable in some circumstances. That is another reason to keep only what you need.

Practical habits

• Record the part you need. Stop the recording before the client discusses something they have asked you not to note, and say that you have.
• Check every AI summary against the transcript before it goes into the file. Correct it and mark it as reviewed.
• Keep matters separate. File each meeting under the matter it belongs to, so a later search does not mix clients.
• Wear headphones. On speakers, the microphone hears the client as well as you, which confuses who said what.
• Do not use voice recognition on clients without telling them. A voiceprint used to identify someone is biometric data under laws such as the GDPR and Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act.

How Notey fits into this

Notey is one example of a notetaker that keeps the list in question 1 short. It is a Mac app; nothing joins the call.

• Audio is recorded to your Mac and transcribed there with Apple's on-device speech recognition. No speech-to-text service receives it. There is no fallback, debug mode or crash report that sends it.
• With no account, nothing leaves the Mac. Recording, transcription and search work with no account and no network. A lawyer who wants no AI processing can use Notey this way and write notes from the transcript.
• AI notes are opt-in per request. When you ask for a summary, minutes or an answer from Ask Notey, the transcript text — never audio — is sent to Notey's service and on to OpenAI, which processes it as a processor and does not train on it. Notey does not keep the transcript after the response. Automatic write-ups at the end of a meeting are a setting you can leave off. The privacy policy sets this out.
• AI output is labelled as AI-generated, and your edits are marked, so a reviewed note is distinguishable from a draft.
• Voice recognition is off by default, and voices are stored on the Mac and can be forgotten.
• Deleting a meeting removes its recording, transcript and notes, and with sync on, from every one of your Macs.

Notey makes no claim to be approved, certified or compliant for legal work, and it does not decide any of the questions above for you. What it changes is what you have to account for: the audio and the transcript are on your laptop, which means your laptop's encryption, your firm's device policy and your own retention habits carry the weight a vendor's would otherwise carry.

If you work across many client engagements, the day-to-day workflow in AI meeting notes for consultants applies to legal work with little change, and taking notes in confidential meetings covers keeping copies to a minimum.

Frequently asked questions

Is it ethical for a lawyer to use an AI notetaker?

Professional bodies have not banned it, but they expect lawyers to understand the tool, protect client confidences and, in some cases, tell or ask the client. In the US, the ABA's Formal Opinion 512 (July 2024) sets out how the Model Rules apply to generative AI tools; check your own jurisdiction's regulator as well.

Does using an AI notetaker waive attorney–client privilege?

That is a legal question that depends on the jurisdiction and the facts, and this guide does not answer it. The questions to take to counsel are in AI notetakers and attorney–client privilege.

Is Notey approved for legal work?

No. Notey holds no certification and is not approved by any bar or law society. What it offers is a short data flow — audio and transcript on your Mac, transcript text sent only when you ask for AI notes — which you can assess against your own obligations.

Should I tell the client I am using AI for notes?

Often, yes, and sometimes you must. ABA Formal Opinion 512 discusses when a lawyer should communicate the use of generative AI to a client or get informed consent before inputting client information. Telling them is the simple default either way.