In light of this week’s ruling in United States v. Heppner, No. 25-cr-00503-JSR (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 6, 2026), I am adding the language below to my Firm’s fee agreement. In the Heppner case, Judge Jed Rakoff of the Southern District of New York ruled that 31 documents the defendant created using Claude (AI) before his arrest—and later gave to his attorneys—are not protected by attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine.
The docket entry in the case is sparse—just a text order granting the government’s motion without specifying which of the pending motions it applies to. I am working from the government’s motion—available on PACER—and reporting from legal publications confirming that the judge granted the motion to deem the AI materials not privileged.
Here is what Hunt Huey PLLC is going to tell our clients so that they are informed about this risk:
Client Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools
Our communications with you are protected by the attorney-client privilege and our work on your behalf is protected by the attorney work-product doctrine. That means that others, including opponents in a lawsuit and their attorneys, are not entitled to ask for or receive this kind of information.
The attorney-client privilege can be waived by giving third parties information about your communications with us or our work on your behalf. One federal judge has held that ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and other AI tools are “third parties.” If you enter information about your case into such tools, you may waive the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work-product protection. In addition, any information you get back from these tools is not protected by the privilege, and others, including opposing parties and their lawyers, may be able to require that you give them both the questions you asked and the answers you got. In addition, deleting AI-generated material about your case could constitute spoliation of evidence, which may result in sanctions against you.
For these reasons you agree that you will not use any AI tools like ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini to research or analyze anything related to your case without talking to us first.
You also understand that we cannot accept or use AI-generated legal research created by you. Our fees reflect the work we must perform to represent you competently in accordance with our professional standards. Client-generated AI content cannot replace this work and may harm your case if the privilege is lost.
If you want to use AI for anything case-related, ask us first. We’ll explain the risks and see if there’s a safe way to proceed.
By signing below, you agree: (1) that you will not use AI tools for case-related matters without consulting us, (2) that you will tell us immediately if you’ve already used AI tools about this case, and (3) you understand that AI content you create independently cannot reduce our fees or substitute for our legal work.
This restriction applies to the entire scope of our representation.
Client Initials: ________
Date:________
Legal Ethics Today 