Calculated Correspondence
Communication can be tricky during a divorce—the process emotional, the stakes often high. Increasingly, people are looking at artificial-intelligence programs like ChatGPT and Google Gemini to help draft texts and emails, particularly in cases with high-conflict spouses or contentious co-parenting.
“I’m seeing a lot of people pre-clearing their communications—before they send it to the other side, or their ex—through ChatGPT,” says attorney Jill Seiferth of Bean, Kinney, & Korman. “These are people who are more cognizant of ‘Maybe I can send this in a better way’ or ‘How do I not inflame the situation?’—which I think has actually been beneficial. AI offers that help to make it less emotional and more productive.”
While using AI may be new, vetting communication during litigation is not. Seiferth has on occasion offered to clear something for a client or give them a “gut check,” but lately she’s seen improved communication across the board, with clients telling her they’re running things through a chatbot.
The co-parenting app OurFamilyWizard—which lawyers often recommend to couples to keep a record of messages, along with shared calendars for kids’ activities and appointments—has for years had a ToneMeter feature to detect and flag instances where there’s an issue with the tone of a message, but its recently launched AI-driven version can now also propose “neutral” edits.
“I’ve certainly resorted to helping clients draft emails, and you can imagine how ex-pensive that might be at a lawyer’s hourly rate,” says Sean Schmergel of Schmergel & Mersberger. “So this kind of tool is useful and probably saves people a lot of money.”
Keeping the communication in check is important not only for the overall impact on the relationships involved but also for the outcome. When courts hear difficult custody cases, Schmergel says, it’s not unusual for text messages and emails to be presented in evidence: “I’ve had cases where there were extremely negative or denigrating comments or expletives used in communications between the parties that had an adverse impact on the outcome of the case.” His standard advice to people is to ensure that correspondence is concise, cordial, and respectful.
“These emails will definitely come back in the litigation if you’ve gone off the rails,” Schmergel says. “When a judge sees that, they’re going to think, ‘This is somebody who is unable to effectively communicate and co-parent. This is somebody who doesn’t have the appropriate level of respect for the other parent.’ That could absolutely affect the outcome of a custody litigation.”
On the flip side, Sanford Ain of Ain & Bank warns that when tensions aren’t as high and it’s possible for two parties to communicate personally, a human touch—rather than stripping all the emotion from communication—can be better. “There’s a sterility to electronic communication that removes the negative emotion,” Ain says, “but it also removes the ability to let the other person know that ‘I still have feelings for you and for our kids and would love to get along.’ That’s missing or diminished significantly by the new ways of communicating.”
When AI Goes Wrong
Although seeking writing help from a tool like ChatGPT can be helpful when the intent is well-meaning, Cheryl New of New & Lowinger—who says she would recommend that a client stop using AI tools “in a New York minute” if she found out—recently saw it all backfire in a major way: During a high-conflict custody case, New noticed that the opposing party’s written communication drastically changed once litigation began, while their verbal communications to her client, she says, continued to be “quite vitriolic.” She was able to argue that the opposing party wasn’t as cooperative as they appeared in writing. New says they were able to present to the court written communication that had taken place before the start of litigation and compare it to what was being written during, to highlight the change.
“The level of cooperation in those emails was a total sham,” New says. “What ended up happening in court—and the judge was very attuned to this—was we actually produced some of the emails and text exchanges where you could tell the font was just copied and pasted from ChatGPT. It has kind of a formulaic approach—stylistically, it was clearly AI-generated,” New says. “We were able, in discovery, to make [the other party] produce what they’d originally asked ChatGPT. It did not go well for them, to say the least.”
The concern for the court, New says, was that this person was saying one thing and doing something else—a false attempt to show cooperative communications on their part.
For that case, New says, they didn’t forensically access the ChatGPT history—the sender had printed copies of all the communication, including not only the messages that ChatGPT had produced but also what was put into the tool, and in a discovery request, New was able to ask for anything that had been printed.
Seiferth says she knows of at least one lawyer who has attempted to subpoena ChatGPT (though she’s unsure of the details of the case): “You can issue a subpoena to cellular companies, internet companies, trying to pull data or information that a party has used, or to compel the production of a device so it can be mirrored so that you can see what has been searched. And so [chatbot histories] would arguably be discoverable.”
Bottom line: Using AI to foster genuine, civil discourse can be helpful, but insincere attempts—like using it to hide hostility from a judge—won’t work if the original prompts end up being submitted as evidence.
An Educational Primer
Lawyers we spoke with said that in addition to using AI to check the tenor of messages, they’ve seen an increase in consulting AI before contacting a lawyer at all.
“A significant percentage of our clients will go online, go to ChatGPT or another AI source, get information about divorce—grounds, factors in determining custody, determining division of property, determining alimony—and be considerably more educated than in years past before AI,” says Ain. He says he’s fine with people educating themselves in this way—similar to how they have for years via search engines like Google as well as friends they talk to. “But now,” with AI, he says, “they’re doing it even to a greater extent. Occasionally, you’ll come up with some ideas that may assist the lawyer.”
But, he cautions, there are limits to the advice AI can dole out. He’s had clients ask ChatGPT, I’ve got X dollars in the bank, and I’ve got these properties—what’s a good settlement for me? “ChatGPT will answer that, but it won’t answer it in the same way that a lawyer who can empathize with the family dynamics and the client can,” Ain says.
What’s more, Seiferth warns, ChatGPT can become an age-old distraction in a new form: “In a divorce, when people talk to a lot of people—‘Oh, my friend, my brother, my neighbor said’—everybody has a different experience, and if you’re constantly getting data points and responding to them, your case isn’t going to be linear.” Consulting AI can have a similar effect, she says, leaving clients feeling less confident in their decisions, making them second-guess themselves, and often costing them more. “You have to be careful with how much you’re taking in and how much weight you’re giving that.”
New agrees: “It’s often detrimental, because there’s such an information flow and people aren’t at their best when they’re going through [divorce]—they’re not necessarily calm, rational, logical. They can be influenced improperly or inappropriately.”
Rather than seeking legal advice from AI, Seiferth suggests putting the tool to use analyzing and synthesizing data as needed, such as poring over receipts and costs related to child support or other expenses in financial statements. Ultimately, she says, “you just have to be mindful of how you use it. How much authority are you giving this thing?”
Top Divorce Lawyers
These divorce attorneys were voted by fellow lawyers as the best among their peers. We started with our most recent list of Top Lawyers, from December 2024, then conducted more reporting and research to update the section on divorce and family attorneys. The following are the people to see for prenups, splits, custody disputes, and other family-law issues.
Jessica E. Adler
The Law Office of Jessica E. Adler
Alice Ahearn
Eris Law Group
Sanford K. Ain
Ain & Bank
Erik P. Arena
Lerch Early & Brewer
Natalia Wilson Armstrong
Ain & Bank
Kristina Badalian
Grover & Badalian
Emily Baker
Tucker
Marina S. Barannik
Tucker
Elizabeth Bookwalter
Patterson Bookwalter
Jennifer Bradley
Mullett Dove & Bradley Family Law
Sandra A. Brooks
Offit Kurman
Barbara A. Burr
Burr Law Firm
David Rust Clarke
Blankingship & Keith
Heather S. Collier
Roberts Family Law
Joesph A. Condo
Offit Kurman
Glenn M. Cooper
Lerch Early & Brewer
Heather A. Cooper
Cooper Ginsberg Gray
James Ray Cottrell
Cottrell Fletcher & Cottrell
John K. Cottrell
Cottrell Fletcher & Cottrell
Gerald R. Curran
Curran Moher Weis
Jonathan M. Dana
Tucker
Jennifer Davison
Tucker
Julie Hottle Day
Culin Sharp Autry & Day
Lin Delaney
Delaney Stafford
Regina A. DeMeo
Markham Law Firm
Sara M. Donahue
Stein Sperling
Laura Dove
Mullet Dove & Bradley Family Law
Matthew Edwards
Ain & Bank
Darryl Feldman
Feldman Jackson
Lisa Fishberg
Webb Soypher McGrath
Casey Weinberg Florance
Collier Florance Van Scoy
Julie Curran Gerock
Maddox & Gerock
David L. Ginsberg
Cooper Ginsberg Gray
Erin C. Golding
Offit Kurman
Steven Goldman
Curran Moher Weis
Daniel L. Gray
Cooper Ginsberg Gray
Anne Grover
Grover & Badalian
Colleen Haddow
Schinstock & Haddow
Hadrian N. Hatfield
Strickler Platnick & Hatfield
Sandra L. Havrilk
Blankingship & Keith
Lynn E. Hawkins
Bean Kinney & Korman
Kristin Henrikson
Henrikson Law
Cheryl Hepfer
Offit Kurman
Susan Hicks
Hicks Crandall Juhl
Brian M. Hirsch
Hirsch & Ehlenberger
Leslie Weber Hoffman
Family Law & Mediation Center
Heather Hostetter
Hostetter Strent
Anne Marie Jackson
Feldman Jackson
Eva N. Juncker
Cipriani & Werner
Shelia J. Kadagathur
Hostetter Strent
Lynette Kleiza
Lerch Early & Brewer
Erin L. Kopelman
Lerch Early & Brewer
Robert Kostecka
Paradiso Taub Sinay & Kostecka
Samantha H. Kravitz
Offit Kurman
Melissa Kucinski
MKFL: International Family Law
Kristen L. Kugel
Cooper Ginsberg Gray
Christian M. Lapham
Bean Kinney & Korman
Robert C. Liotta
Jeff Lowinger
New & Lowinger
Katharine Maddox
Maddox & Gerock
Christopher Malinowski
Malinowski Hubbard
Sarah Mancinelli
Ain & Bank
Jessica Markham
Markham Law Firm
Michael C. May
May Law
Jennifer McCammon
Bean Kinney & Korman
Rhian McGrath
Webb Soypher McGrath
Margaret J. McKinney
Lerch Early & Brewer
Heather L. Mehigan
Shulman Rogers
Theresa Mihalik
Bean Kinney & Korman
Jennifer Mullett
Mullett Dove & Bradley Family Law
Cheryl New
New & Lowinger
Gregory Nugent
Nugent Law
Nathan J. Olson
Cooper Ginsberg Gray
Katherine A. O’Rourke
Tucker
Carrie Patterson
Patterson Bookwalter
Brian K. Pearlstein
Brodsky Renehan Pearlstein & Bouquet
Sarah A. Piper
Hicks Crandall Juhl
Sonya L. Powell
Powell Radomsky
Cynthia M. Radomsky
Powell Radomsky
Paul J. Reinstein
Reinstein Glackin & Herriott
Christopher W. Roberts
Roberts Family Law
David E. Roop Jr.
Roop Law
Christopher W. Schinstock
Schinstock & Haddow
Sean P. Schmergel
Schmergel & Mersberger
Rebecca C. Shankman
Feldman Jackson
Michael Sinay
Paradiso Taub Sinay & Kostecka
Stephanie J. Smith
Cooper Ginsberg Gray
Howard B. Soypher
Webb Soypher McGrath
Amy W. Spain
Ain & Bank
Hope Stafford
Delaney Stafford
Amy B. Strent
Hostetter Strent
Rebekah Sullivan
District Family Law
Robin Taub
Paradiso Taub Sinay & Kostecka
K. Leigh Taylor
Taylor Huguley Powers
Donna E. Van Scoy
Florance Van Scoy
Deborah L. Webb
Webb Soypher McGrath
Marshall Yaap
Offit Kurman
Julia A. Yolles
Blankingship & Keith
Sogand Zamani
Zamani & Associates
Sarah J. Zimmerman
Tucker
This article appears in the December 2025 issue of Washingtonian.
Amy leads Washingtonian Weddings and writes Style Setters for Washingtonian. Prior to joining Washingtonian in March 2016, she was the editor of Capitol File magazine in DC and before that, editor of What’s Up? Weddings in Annapolis.
