Using ChatGPT to Interpret Insurance Policies? Eleventh Circuit ...
While recently resolving an insurance coverage dispute in Snell v. United Specialty Insurance Company, 102 F.4th 1208 (11th Cir. 2024), an Eleventh Circuit concurring opinion discussed the potential employment of artificial intelligence large language models to interpret policy terms.
AI in Legal Interpretation
The case in question involved whether a landscaper’s insurance policy, which typically covered claims related to "landscaping," extended to the installation of a "ground-level trampoline." The court ruled in favor of the insurer, with Judge Kevin Newsom's concurrence exploring the use of AI, such as ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and Anthropic's Claude, in interpreting policy provisions.
Judge Newsom found traditional dictionary definitions unhelpful and experimented with ChatGPT to define "landscaping." The potential benefits of AI in legal interpretation were discussed, including the ability to offer alternative perspectives and identify ambiguities.
Implications and Limitations of AI
While Judge Newsom did not entirely endorse AI for policy interpretation, he acknowledged its potential implications. AI models like ChatGPT could provide insights into ordinary language use and offer multiple interpretations of policy terms, aiding in resolving ambiguities.
The concurrence highlighted the limitations of traditional sources like dictionaries in interpreting policy terms.
Furthermore, the concurrence highlighted the limitations of traditional sources like dictionaries in interpreting policy terms. Dictionaries often provide narrow definitions that may not align with everyday usage, whereas AI models can draw from diverse sources to capture modern language nuances.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/alternative_investment_sourcefile-edit-3b2e77b9b0f242a3a4963185d22b07dc.jpg)
Best Practices and Recommendations
Judge Newsom recommended a cautious approach to utilizing AI in legal interpretation, emphasizing the need for transparency in queries and results. Counsel and jurists should be aware of the potential for manipulation or bias when using AI models in litigation.
In conclusion, while emphasizing the growing presence of AI in the legal field, Judge Newsom encouraged responsible and informed use of AI tools for policy interpretation.
If you want to delve deeper into the capabilities of AI in legal interpretation, feel free to explore more about Lexology or get in touch via our About page.
If you would like to learn more about how Lexology can enhance your content marketing strategy, please reach out to us via email at [email protected].
Upcoming Events:
Don't miss out on these upcoming events:
