Friday, October 24, 2025

11:45 to 12:45 via Zoom

1 CLE Hour including Ethics

Free to NPBA members; $30 non-members

Presenter: Marcus K. Mitchell, Pender & Coward

Marcus is a Pender & Coward attorney focusing his practice on family law, eminent domain/right of way law and criminal and traffic law.  He regularly represents clients in divorces, custody and visitation matters, separation agreements, pre-nuptial agreements, post-nuptial agreements, child support matters, spousal support matters, and protective orders. He also has experience handling Child Protective Services appeals, show causes, extraditions, and unlawful detainers.  Marcus works on litigation matters for condemning authorities in eminent domain cases.  In his criminal and traffic practice, Marcus represents clients in matters involving assault and battery, assault and battery on a family member, as well as reckless driving and speeding tickets.

Marcus is an Adjunct Professor at Regent University, teaching Mock Trial in the undergraduate program. From 2020 to 2025, he taught Trial Practice & Advanced Trial Practice in the law school and coached the law school's national mock trial competition teams, helping the team achieve several regional and national championships during his tenure.

During college, Marcus was a four-year starter for the Randolph-Macon College football team, winning the Old Dominion Athletic Conference Championship in his senior season.

Agenda

1. Introduction & Poll 
   • Briefly define AI and the “black box” problem.
   • (If enough attendees) Run instant poll asking attorneys if they currently use AI tools and what concerns they have (confidentiality, accuracy, cost).
2. Ethical Obligations and Rules 
   • Present the key points from Formal Opinion 512 and Virginia Legal Ethics Opinion 1901, the Supreme Court of Virginia’s generative‑AI rules, and confidentiality obligations under Rule 1.6.
   • Discuss value‑based billing and the requirement to verify AI outputs.
   • Stress the need to double‑check AI results and discuss the consequences of failing to do so as shown in recent sanctions cases across the United States, and present case studies illustrating risks of using third‑party AI vendors.
   • Show a potential AI policy for their firm that covers disclosure, permitted tools, and oversight.
3. Demonstration of AI in Legal Research and Drafting 
   • Use a live demonstration to show how AI can speed legal research and drafting.
   • Use AI (or brainstorm) to outline a case strategy, draft a few interrogatories, and identify potential motions (e.g., a motion for forensic accounting).
   • Applying the AI to family law: compare strategies and discuss Virginia law on marital waste and dissipation, use of AI to simulate opposing counsel’s arguments.
4. Conclusion & Q&A 
   • Summarize the session with key takeaways, such as always verify AI output, maintain confidentiality, and view AI as a tool rather than a replacement.