A February 2026 federal ruling by U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in U.S. v. Heppner held that conversations with AI chatbots like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini carry no attorney-client privilege, making them discoverable evidence. For New York divorcing spouses, this means prompts asking an AI how to hide assets can be subpoenaed and used against you in an equitable-distribution fight under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 236.
Key Facts
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| What happened | Federal court ruled AI-chatbot conversations carry no attorney-client privilege |
| When | February 2026 (Rakoff ruling); conflicting Michigan decision issued shortly after |
| Where | S.D.N.Y. (Rakoff) vs. a Michigan federal court reaching the opposite result |
| Who's affected | Anyone using ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini for legal questions during a dispute |
| Key statute/rule | Attorney-client privilege doctrine; N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 236 governs NY property division |
| Impact | AI prompts about assets, custody, or strategy are now discoverable in divorce |
According to Ward and Smith, P.A. and the National Law Review, family-law firms are now actively warning clients to stop typing sensitive divorce questions into consumer AI tools. The privilege question remains genuinely unsettled: Rakoff's U.S. v. Heppner ruling in February 2026 found no privilege attaches, while a conflicting Michigan federal decision protected such logs, leaving a live circuit-level dispute heading into late 2026.
Why this matters legally
Attorney-client privilege protects only communications between you and a licensed lawyer — an AI chatbot is neither your attorney nor a person, so no privilege attaches. That is the core holding practitioners are extracting from Rakoff's February 2026 opinion. When you ask ChatGPT "how do I move money before filing," that prompt is stored on a third-party server owned by OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google, and a subpoena can reach it the same way it reaches your bank records or emails.
The distinction matters because privilege is not the same as confidentiality. A conversation can feel private while still being fully discoverable. Courts have long held that voluntarily sharing information with a third party waives any privilege claim — and typing into a commercial AI product is a textbook third-party disclosure. The unresolved Michigan decision suggests some judges may carve out narrow protections, but no New York court has adopted that view, so New York litigants should assume their AI logs are fair game.
How New York law handles this
New York is an equitable-distribution state under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 236, meaning marital property is divided fairly — not necessarily equally — based on statutory factors including each spouse's conduct. That conduct factor is exactly where AI chat logs become dangerous. If discovery reveals you asked an AI how to shield a brokerage account or undervalue a business, a New York judge can treat that as evidence of dissipation and adjust the distribution against you.
New York's disclosure rules reinforce this exposure. Both spouses must file a sworn Statement of Net Worth, and CPLR discovery permits broad requests for "all matter material and necessary" to the case. Under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 236 Part B, a court that finds one spouse hid or wasted marital assets can award the other spouse a larger share or a separate money judgment. AI prompts documenting an intent to hide assets are a prosecutor's dream exhibit — contemporaneous, dated, and in your own words.
Custody adds another layer. New York decides parenting arrangements under the best-interests standard, and messages showing manipulative planning can undercut a parent's credibility. Learning how the divorce process actually works — including what discovery can reach — is far safer than probing an AI. If your circumstances change later, formal procedures like child support modification and spousal support modification exist precisely so you don't have to improvise.
Practical takeaways
-
Stop entering case-specific facts into ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini. Under the February 2026 Rakoff standard, those prompts are discoverable and can surface in your New York divorce. Treat every prompt as if it may be read aloud in court.
-
Never ask any AI how to hide, move, or undervalue assets. New York's equitable-distribution factors under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 236 let a judge penalize dissipation, and a dated AI log is powerful proof of intent.
-
Route sensitive questions through a licensed attorney, where privilege genuinely applies. Only communications with your lawyer are protected — the chatbot conversation is not.
-
Use general educational resources instead of case-specific AI prompts. Reading about no-fault divorce in New York or estimating fees with our divorce cost estimator does not create a discoverable record about your specific strategy.
-
Preserve, don't delete. Once litigation is reasonably anticipated, deleting existing AI logs can trigger spoliation sanctions under New York law. Talk to counsel before purging anything.
-
Build a plan the right way. A personalized divorce roadmap can organize your next steps without generating risky prompts, and you can find a divorce attorney in your county when you need privileged advice.
If you're facing a New York divorce and have been using AI tools to research your situation, the smart move is to pause and speak with a qualified family-law attorney before you take another step. A short consultation can clarify what is discoverable, what is privileged, and how to protect yourself under New York's equitable-distribution framework.
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.