What Ohio's new guidance actually asks of you
This year the Board of Professional Conduct released the Ohio Ethics Guide on Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers and Judicial Officers. It is nonbinding staff guidance and it doesn't endorse any product. Its starting point is plain: nothing in Ohio's Rules of Professional Conduct stops a lawyer from using AI to help serve clients. The duties you already have still apply. You keep client information confidential under Rule 1.6. You supervise the staff and vendors who touch your work. And you understand the technology well enough to use it responsibly.
That matches the American Bar Association's Formal Opinion 512 from 2024, which landed in the same place on confidentiality. Before client information goes into a tool, know how that tool handles it.
For a small firm in Lima, the practical question is whether you know where your client data lives and who can see it. Whether you're allowed to use AI is already settled. Most small firms can't answer the data question today, because intake is spread across a web form inbox, a paper questionnaire, a spreadsheet and somebody's memory. A custom CRM fixes that, and it's also where AI does real work.
One use case: the intake-to-engagement pipeline
Focus on the stretch between "someone reached out" and "signed engagement letter." Small firms lose people there. A prospective client who contacted three firms on Monday usually signs with whoever gets them a conflict-cleared consult first. Meanwhile the paperwork in between eats hours an attorney should spend on casework.
A CRM built around how your firm works treats that stretch as a pipeline with real stages: inquiry, conflict check, consult scheduled, consult held, engagement letter out, then signed or declined. Every inquiry becomes a record when it arrives, whether it came from the website, a referral from another Allen County attorney, or someone who walked in.
Here's what the automations do at each stage:
- New inquiry: the intake form becomes a structured record. The names of the opposing party and related people are checked against your existing clients and adverse parties, and any possible match goes to an attorney before anyone books a consult.
- Consult held: AI drafts a short matter summary from the intake answers and the attorney's notes. The attorney edits it before anyone relies on it.
- Engagement letter unsigned after two business days: the paralegal gets a task and a drafted follow-up.
- Declined or no-hire: a non-engagement letter task opens automatically, so the file shows clearly that the firm did not take the matter.
None of that is exotic. The value comes from fitting your intake questions, your practice areas and your conflict list. You aren't forcing a family law practice into a sales tool designed for selling software.
What you get, and how to judge it
The work starts with a CRM spec. It describes each pipeline stage in writing: who owns it, and what has to be true before a matter moves forward. Next comes the data model, the part most off-the-shelf setups get wrong. A law firm's core records aren't leads and deals. They're people, matters and the relationships between them: client, opposing party, opposing counsel, referral source, insurer. Get that structure right and a conflict check becomes a search instead of a guess. Last is a build plan. It sets what gets built in what order, what connects to your existing practice management or document system, and where client data is stored.
That last item ties back to the Ohio guide. Confidentiality and vendor supervision are your duties, so the build plan should state plainly which AI features see client information, which provider processes it, and whether that provider keeps it or trains on it. If a consultant can't fit that on one page, keep looking.
You don't need to take anyone's word on whether it worked. Pull your own numbers before and after: hours from inquiry to cleared conflict check, hours to a consult, the share of consults that sign, and how many engagement letters sat unsigned past a week. Your calendar and your files will tell you.
Sources
- Law and AI: Ethics Guidance Delivered to Ohio Lawyers — Court News Ohio (Supreme Court of Ohio)
- Ohio Board of Professional Conduct Issues Ohio Ethics Guide on Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers and Judicial Officers — Benesch
- Ohio's New AI Ethics Guide: What Every Lawyer and Judge Needs to Know Right Now — Husch Blackwell
- ABA issues first ethics guidance on a lawyer's use of AI tools — American Bar Association
Want this working in your Lima business?
Book a free AI audit — we'll show you exactly where to start.
