CLE Program

The Pinto decision upended long-standing assumptions in California insurance litigation, directly challenging the validity of CACI 2334 and setting off a wave of change across bad faith failure-to-settle claims. In response, courts and legislators acted—producing two significant published opinions and ushering in Code of Civil Procedure § 999, which now governs pre-litigation settlement demands.

Artificial intelligence is rapidly changing how legal professionals draft, research, and strategize. But how can attorneys use these tools effectively—and ethically?

In this engaging and practical CLE program, Dan Garrison, CEO of OpenWallet and adjunct professor at the University of Utah College of Law, and Judge Victoria Wood (Ret.), a seasoned neutral and retired judge, explore how generative AI tools like ChatGPT can be used to enhance legal work product without compromising professional obligations.

The program will demonstrate a hands-on exercise for using AI to optimize (not replace!) human work product —showing how attorneys can train AI to improve outputs through structured prompting, context building, and iterative feedback. Through real examples and interactive discussion, the speakers will highlight best practices for leveraging AI tools in tasks like legal drafting, oral argument preparation, and brief analysis.

Interwoven throughout the presentation will be key ethical considerations under the California Rules of Professional Conduct, including duties of competence, confidentiality, candor to the tribunal, and oversight of non-lawyer (and now, non-human) assistance.

Attendees will leave with practical takeaways, sample prompts, and an adaptable framework for integrating AI tools into their legal practice—safely, ethically, and effectively.

Participatory credit is taken at its word in this interactive program. Using audience volunteers and a fact pattern, the panelists will perform a mock voir dire, demonstrating plaintiff’s and defense perspectives, presided over by retired Judge Steve Austin. Following the mock voir dire, the speakers will dissect where they went right and where they went wrong in the search for a jury.