Program Details
2026-12-09 12:00:00
Over 1,000+ webinars
Course Overview
2026-12-09 12:00:00
2h CLE Credits
Intermediate
2
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm ESTThis session will examine how lawyers can interpret and negotiate AI restrictions in protective orders while protecting confidential discovery and preserving effective litigation tools. The program begins with the legal framework, including protective orders, standing orders, professional duties, and work-product protection. Attendees will then learn how to read AI clauses, focusing on covered information, covered technologies, prohibited conduct, exceptions, and conditions for use. The discussion will cover how AI is used in litigation workflows, including document review, legal research, drafting, integrated assistants, and connected applications, and how to evaluate tools against an order by looking at contractual terms, account settings, data retention, training, access, and third-party processing. The session will also address negotiating practical restrictions before an order is entered, with attention to proportionality and the receiving party’s litigation needs. It will also cover responding to restrictions proposed mid-case and building an evidentiary record, including work-product concerns. The program concludes with practical hypotheticals, key takeaways, and a question-and-answer period.
Michael Yancey III 1:10 pm - 2:10 pm ESTThis hour treats an entered AI clause the way a privacy program treats a regulated data set: map where the data goes, govern the tools that touch it, document the controls, and be ready to respond when something goes wrong. It covers tracing an opponent’s production through the firm’s systems and classifying each AI tool against the order’s actual standard; vendor due diligence on training use, retention, subprocessors, and security; tying the AI-tool certification to the firm’s AI governance policy and the records behind it; matter isolation and verifiable deletion at conclusion; and handling material already inside a tool as an incident, with containment, forensic confirmation, clawback, and notice. Where a production carries personal or health information, it also shows how SHIELD Act, HIPAA, and other privacy obligations sit on top of the order. It is built for litigators who receive productions and use AI on matters but have never served an AI-tool certification, answered a demand to name the tool used, or met a five-day clawback clock against a chat history. Attendees leave with three instruments: a compliance-file checklist, a certification template keyed to Orechovesky ¶15, and an unpermitted-upload incident-response playbook.
Jessica L. CopelandJessica L. Copeland chairs the Cybersecurity and Data Privacy practice at Bond, Schoeneck & King PLLC, practicing from the firm’s Buffalo and New York City offices. She advises clients on AI governance and AI-use policies, counsels on compliance with the New York SHIELD Act, HIPAA, HITECH, CCPA, GDPR, and the NY DFS Cybersecurity Regulations, and leads incident response, including forensic engagement and oversight, breach notification, inadvertent disclosures, ransomware, and business email compromise matters. She is a veteran commercial litigator with trial and appellate experience in state and federal court.
Michael Yancey III is Managing Attorney at Consumer Justice Law Firm in Scottsdale, Arizona, where he leads the firm’s legal drafting department, supervises its law clerks, and represents consumers in federal and state courts nationwide with an emphasis on brief writing and trial advocacy. His study of electronic discovery at Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law earned a CALI Excellence for the Future Award, and he holds the school’s Certificate in Law, Science, and Technology.
Jessica L. Copeland chairs the Cybersecurity and Data Privacy practice at Bond, Schoeneck & King PLLC, practicing from the firm’s Buffalo and New York City offices. She advises clients on AI governance and AI-use policies, counsels on compliance with the New York SHIELD Act, HIPAA, HITECH, CCPA, GDPR, and the NY DFS Cybersecurity Regulations, and leads incident response, including forensic engagement and oversight, breach notification, inadvertent disclosures, ransomware, and business email compromise matters. She is a veteran commercial litigator with trial and appellate experience in state and federal court.
Michael Yancey III is Managing Attorney at Consumer Justice Law Firm in Scottsdale, Arizona, where he leads the firm’s legal drafting department, supervises its law clerks, and represents consumers in federal and state courts nationwide with an emphasis on brief writing and trial advocacy. His study of electronic discovery at Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law earned a CALI Excellence for the Future Award, and he holds the school’s Certificate in Law, Science, and Technology.
Requirements
The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.
Formats
