Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming part of nearly every stage of an automobile accident claim. Many insurers are using AI-assisted systems to review photographs, prepare repair estimates, detect possible fraud, summarize medical records, and evaluate settlement demands. Lawyers may use similar tools to organize documents, identify issues, and prepare initial drafts for simple matters. So when does AI’s efficiency in evaluating and defending claims stop adding value and human judgment need to take the wheel?
AI’s Growing Role in Claims Handling
Recent news reports show how quickly this technology is evolving in claims handling. Some insurers now allow drivers to submit photographs through proprietary apps so AI-guided software can estimate vehicle damage. AI’s role is even expanding beyond claims processing and claim intake to earlier interactions with customers, including policy acquisition. Examples include:
- Travelers Insurance recently introduced an AI-assisted service for taking automobile damage claims by telephone.[i] The service uses advanced language and speech recognition technologies, and the company intends to “…expand to additional lines of business and a broader set of claim interactions over time.”
- In late 2025, State Farm announced its collaboration with OpenAI and promoted its “Accident Assistance” program, which is designed to automate intake, route files, estimate repair severity from photos, and detect potential fraud.[ii]
- Liberty Mutual is expanding its use of AI beyond auto damage estimating by helping customers obtain auto insurance policies.[iii] Their proprietary app “…allows ChatGPT users to obtain an auto insurance [policy] quote … in minutes through a conversational, chat-based interaction, rather than a traditional online form.”
For insurers, these systems may make handling routine claims faster and help their customers acclimate to the presence of AI in their company-to-consumer relationships. Recent studies by Sedgwick[iv] report that using AI to handle low-severity claims has led to 80% faster processing times and 50% productivity gains in documentation tasks for some carriers. The study also reports that as many as 82% of carriers are using AI in some capacity during the claims process.
Speed, however, is simply not the same as accuracy. A photograph may not reveal damage beneath a bumper if the claimant doesn’t know there’s damage there that needs to be documented. An automated valuation may not appreciate how a serious injury affects a particular person’s work, family, or future medical needs. Most importantly, as Sedgwick notes in its report, “AI is a powerful tool, but it will never replace the judgment, empathy and real-world experience humans bring to the claims process. Losses that are ambiguous, emotionally sensitive or require nuanced coverage decisions need human professionals who can consider context, communicate clearly and advocate for policyholders.” Law firms and adjusters can rest assured—the human touch that skilled counsel and experienced claims professionals provide is not reproducible by technology.
Ethical and Professional Risks of AI in Litigation
Attorneys also must be cognizant of the road hazards AI can present in handling the litigation phase of a claim. In Kruse v. Karlen, 692 S.W.3d 43 (Mo. App. E.D. 2024), the Court of Appeals confronted a brief containing fictitious authorities and imposed sanctions on counsel. In the Southern District of Indiana, counsel in Mid Central Operating Engineers Health & Welfare Fund v. HoosierVac LLC was ultimately sanctioned $6,000 after filing briefs containing nonexistent, AI-generated cases.[v]
While these were not specifically automobile accident decisions, their lesson applies directly to personal injury litigation: a lawyer remains responsible for every fact, argument, and citation submitted to a court. AI cannot replace independent legal research, professional judgment, or candor to the tribunal. Both Missouri and Texas, for example, have addressed counsel’s duties when using AI.
- Missouri considers AI to require counsel to consider several lanes of professional responsibility, inter alia: protection of attorney-client privileged information, competence, fee adjustments, and candor towards the tribunal.[vi]
- Likewise, the Texas Committee on Professional Ethics makes the same conclusions, noting that “…lawyers should acquire basic technological competence before using any generative AI tool, should always ensure that the tool does not imperil confidential client information, [and] should always verify the accuracy of any responses received from a generative AI tool…”[vii]
As this area of law develops, courts will likely continue to provide guidance on the appropriate use of AI in representing clients.
Conclusion
In auto accident claims, AI’s speed is no substitute for careful professional judgment. AI can be a valuable assistant in an auto accident case, helping process information more efficiently and identifying issues requiring closer examination. That being said, AI can help steer a claim, but it cannot replace the human judgment needed to navigate every curve. It can’t interview a witness, understand the human cost of an injury, independently verify its own work, or exercise the judgment required to advise a client. In the end, AI may ride shotgun on the road of auto claims—but human judgment must remain behind the wheel.
[i] “Travelers Launches Industry-Leading Agentic AI Claim Assistant Developed with OpenAI,” February 18, 2026; https://investor.travelers.com/newsroom/press-releases/news-details/2026/Travelers-Launches-Industry-Leading-Agentic-AI-Claim-Assistant-Developed-with-OpenAI/default.aspx
[ii] “A New Era of Road Safety:How Mobile Accident Detection Technology Is Bridging The Divide Between Risk And Response,” February 4, 2026; https://newsroom.statefarm.com/new-era-of-road-safety/
[iii] “Liberty Mutual Insurance Launches First-of-its-Kind Carrier-Backed Conversational AI Quoting App in ChatGPT for Auto Insurance,” May 26, 2026; https://www.libertymutualgroup.com/about-lm/news/articles/liberty-mutual-insurance-launches-first-its-kind-carrier-backed-conversational-ai-quoting-app-chatgpt-auto-insurance
[iv] “Future-Ready Property Claims: Leveraging Technology And AI For A Strategic Advantage,” https://marketing.sedgwick.com/acton/attachment/4952/f-50b08dfd-5d0e-4121-97d2-1a0cfcecd8f0/1/-/-/-/-/Sedgwick-Property-Future-Ready-Property-Claims.pdf; see also “Carriers Using AI for Claims but Adoption Is Fragmented, Report Shows,” Claims Journal March 4, 2026; https://www.claimsjournal.com/news/national/2026/03/04/336076.htm
[v] Mid Central Operating Engineers Health & Welfare Fund v. HoosierVac LLC, No. 2:24-cv-326, 2025 WL ___ (S.D. Ind. Feb. 21, 2025)
[vi] Missouri Office Of Legal Ethics Counsel, Informal Opinion Number 2024-11; April 25, 2024, https://mo-legal-ethics.org/informal-opinion/2024-11/
[vii] Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 705 (2025), https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-705/