By Mike Scarcella

WASHINGTON, June 15 (Reuters) - A New York state judge has rejected a subpoena that sought an OpenAI user’s ChatGPT records as evidence in a private lawsuit, finding the chat logs were protected legal research by a defendant in the case.

Justice Rhonda Fischer of Nassau County Supreme Court quashed the subpoena in a ruling made public last week — one of the first decisions to tackle when AI companies must hand over users' records in civil cases.

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

A lawyer for Alpha Tech Lending, Rick Ostrove of law firm Leeds Brown Law, said they disagreed with Fischer’s ruling and plan to appeal.

Recchio in a statement applauded Fischer’s decision. “Civil discovery should not become a back door into private AI records, business information, or account materials absent legitimate legal grounds and court scrutiny,” he said.

OpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The company is not a party in the litigation.

Alpha Tech Lending subpoenaed OpenAI for a range of data from Recchio's use of ChatGPT, including prompts, uploaded material and outputs used to generate filings or communications in the case. It argued the material was relevant to exploring the “basis, accuracy, and authenticity” of Recchio’s claims and defenses.

Recchio, who is representing himself in the case, asked the court to bar the subpoena, calling it a “fishing expedition” that sought “every imaginable piece of private information.” He argued it would expose “private litigation workspace” materials, including legal research, drafts, strategy and other information prepared in anticipation of litigation.

Fischer agreed in a decision dated June 4, concluding that "work product" protections for litigation-related materials applied to Recchio’s AI chats.

The judge cited a ruling in Colorado in which a federal court said a self-represented litigant’s use of AI can resemble “confidential, strategy-laden iterative work product.” Although AI tools collect user data, the judge in Colorado said, it “does not eliminate all expectations of privacy or automatically waive protections.”

A judge in federal court in New York issued a competing order in February, but Fischer said that involved a criminal case, not a civil one.

Read more:

Judge rules both sides in lawsuit misused AI, disqualifies lawyers

Group fights Shell Oil bid for AI prompts used in climate lawsuit

Fallout grows for former law partner sanctioned over AI 'hallucination'

OpenAI says ChatGPT is not a lawyer, asks court to toss insurer's lawsuit

US judges weigh risks as AI seeps into judicial work