"The Undersigned Cannot Recall a Comparable Instance of Such Brazen and Repeated Dishonesty" in 55 Years as a Judge
The "filings have led to the Court completely losing trust in" the lawyers involved.
The "filings have led to the Court completely losing trust in" the lawyers involved.
The claim is "iffy" partly because part of the plaintiff's argument is that ... ChatGPT said the award was likely AI-generated.
The firm, has "more than 1,600 attorneys in over 80 offices nationwide."
Don't assume your firm is safe.
An intern and a law clerk used generative AI, and the judges didn't catch the hallucinations.
Lawyers at firms of all size, don't let this happen to you.
"Whether a case cite is obtained from a law review article, a hornbook, or through independent legal research, the duty to ensure that any case cited to a court is "good law" is nearly as old as the practice of law."
for "citing to fabricated, AI-generated cases without verifying the accuracy, or even the existence, of the cases" and "misrepresenting to the Court the origin of the AI-generated cases."
Plus, "He claims that, going forward, he will undertake certain 'remedial efforts,' including, inter alia, 'establish[ing] ... database reconciliation procedures involving resolution of discrepancies through direct consultation of archival legal resources and substitution of alternative, verifiable authorities where necessary.' Most lawyers simply call this 'conducting legal research.'"
There have likely been hundreds of filings with AI-hallucinated citations in American courts, but this is the first time I've seen a court note that a judge had included such a citation.
"it is clear that he, at the very best, acted with culpable neglect of his professional obligations."
And the court declines to so find when the proposed class counsel filed a brief containing "a wholesale fabrication of quotations and a holding on a material issue" (presumably stemming from using AI and not adequately checking its output).
Are human courts the best venue to protect wild animals?
Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.
Make a donation today! No thanksEvery dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interestedSo much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks