AI in litigation series: Complaint accuses OpenAI of practicing law without a license

In this post, we cover a new federal lawsuit filed against OpenAI on March 4, 2026 that raises a novel dispute. In that lawsuit, OpenAI was accused of, among other things, having ChatGPT practice law without a license. Nippon Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. OpenAI Fdn., case no. 1:26-cv-02448 (N.D. Ill. March 4, 2026).

Case background

According to the complaint, this matter has an unusual background. It alleges that an individual filed a long-term disability (LTD) claim with her employer in 2019. Although her claim was initially granted in 2021, it was later determined that the individual no longer met the LTD policy’s definition of “disabled.” In 2022, the individual engaged lawyers and sued several parties involved with the LTD policy. The parties later settled the matter, and executed a settlement agreement in 2024. The case was dismissed with prejudice in January 2024.

One year later, that individual wrote to her lawyer, complaining that the settlement resulted from errors or omissions in facts and that she wanted to challenge/reopen the settlement. The lawyer refuted her claims, pointed out that she had signed the settlement agreement and stated that the case could not be reopened. The individual then sent the lawyer’s response to ChatGPT and asked if she was being gaslighted. ChatGPT concluded that she was. As a result, she fired her lawyer and proceeded to challenge the agreement in court.

According to Nippon Life’s complaint, the individual used ChatGPT to generate arguments to help her reopen the lawsuit, including drafting the motion to reopen the lawsuit as well as a pro se appearance form. The individual then proceeded to file 21 motions, 1 subpoena and 8 notices and statements in support of her motion.

The court rejected the motion in February of 2025, so the individual then filed a new lawsuit, again using a complaint drafted by ChatGPT. According to the complaint, over the next year, the individual filed an additional 44 motions, memoranda, demands, petitions and requests–all drafted with ChatGPT (among those motions and requests was a request for judicial notice of an arbitration clause, which cited a case that does not exist).

As a result of that individual’s actions, Nippon Life filed a lawsuit against OpenAI.

The key claims and allegations against OpenAI

Nippon Life sued OpenAI case on three grounds:

Tortious interference with contract

The individual fed the settlement agreement into ChatGPT and therefore OpenAI was aware of the agreement. Specifically, Paragraph 112 of the complaint alleged:

OpenAI purposefully programmed ChatGPT to reason and deliberately drive user engagement within the parameters it set in the Model Spec. As a result, ChatGPT deliberately provided the individual with legal assistance designed to induce her into breaching the terms of her settlement agreement with Nippon Life, in order to encourage her to further engage with the chatbot.

Abuse of process

The complaint claimed that the individual filed multiple frivolous motions and other documents “with no legitimate or proper purpose.” Paragraph 119 of the complaint claimed that OpenAI, through ChatGPT, "aided and abetted” the individual’s abuse of process by providing individual “with legal advice, legal analysis and legal research, as well as by assisting the individual in the drafting and preparation of her frivolous motions and requests for judicial notice.”

Unlicensed practice of law

Paragraph 123 of the complaint stated that OpenAI, through ChatGPT, “provides legal advice, legal analysis, legal research and can draft legal documents and papers for submission to a Court . . . to any user who requests them,” including the individual. The complaint pointed out that ChatGPT is not licensed to practice law in any state in the United States. [Last year, on October 29, 2025, OpenAI changed its terms of use to prohibit users from using ChatGPT for “provision of tailored advice that requires a license, such as legal or medical advice, without appropriate involvement by a licensed professional.”]

The defendant’s request for relief included several elements, among them:

• A declaratory judgment that ChatGPT practiced law without a license
• A permanent injunction against ChatGPT providing legal advice to individuals
• Punitive damages in the amount of US$10 million

Conclusion

Although the complaint did not specifically address any claims of or issues arising from attorney-client privilege, the allegations that the software engaged in practicing law may give rise to these issues as the case proceeds. The case is in its earliest stages; as of this blog post, OpenAI has not filed its response yet. We will continue to monitor this case and this particular artificial intelligence (AI) issue as courts continue to grapple with the boundaries at the intersection of AI and legal analysis.

About the Series

As companies increasingly integrate and use AI in their daily operations, novel litigation based on those integrations and uses will arise as well. Tracking the sheer volume of cases in all relevant jurisdictions can be time-consuming. This AI in Litigation series aims to alleviate some of the hard work by highlighting relevant AI-related litigation and the key developments in these litigations that companies need to know.