Judge Blocks Bid to Access ChatGPT Records, Ruling AI Logs Are Protected Legal Work Product in Litigation

A New York state judge has quashed a subpoena seeking an OpenAI user's ChatGPT records as evidence in a private lawsuit, ruling that the chat logs constituted protected legal research and litigation work product.

Justice Rhonda Fischer of the Nassau County Supreme Court issued the decision, which was made public last week. The ruling is among the first to address when artificial intelligence companies may be required to disclose users' records in civil litigation.

The lawsuit, filed in 2024 by Alpha Tech Lending, its founder and other plaintiffs, accuses former company president John Recchio III and others of breach of contract, unfair competition and related claims connected to a competing venture. Recchio denies the allegations.

Rick Ostrove of Leeds Brown Law, representing Alpha Tech Lending, said the plaintiffs disagree with the ruling and intend to appeal.

Recchio welcomed the decision, stating: “Civil discovery should not become a back door into private AI records, business information or account materials absent legitimate legal grounds and court scrutiny.”

OpenAI, which is not a party to the litigation, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Alpha Tech Lending had subpoenaed OpenAI for a broad range of data relating to Recchio's use of ChatGPT, including prompts, uploaded materials and outputs used in generating court filings or communications connected to the case. The plaintiffs argued that the information was relevant to examining the “basis, accuracy and authenticity” of Recchio's claims and defences.

Recchio, who is representing himself, asked the court to block the subpoena, describing it as a “fishing expedition” seeking “every imaginable piece of private information”. He argued that compliance would expose his private litigation workspace, including legal research, draft documents, case strategy and other materials prepared in anticipation of litigation.

In a decision dated June 4, Justice Fischer agreed, finding that work-product protections applicable to litigation-related materials extended to Recchio's interactions with AI tools.

The judge also referred to a Colorado federal court ruling which found that a self-represented litigant's use of AI can amount to “confidential, strategy-laden iterative work product”. While AI platforms may collect user data, the Colorado court observed that this “does not eliminate all expectations of privacy or automatically waive protections”.

Justice Fischer distinguished the case from a February ruling issued by a federal court in New York, noting that the earlier decision arose in a criminal matter rather than a civil dispute. The distinction, she suggested, was significant in determining the scope of discovery and the protections available to litigants using AI-assisted legal research tools.

 For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.