You won’t believe the excuses lawyers have after getting busted for using AI – wamdat Tech

The judge in the case, Nancy Miller, was clear that “such statements display an astounding lack of awareness of counsel’s obligations,” noting that “the responsibility for correcting erroneous and fake citations never shifts to opposing counsel or the court, even if they are the first to notice the errors.”
“The duty to mitigate the harms caused by such errors remains with the signor,” Miller said. “The sooner such errors are properly corrected, either by withdrawing or amending and supplementing the offending pleadings, the less time is wasted by everyone involved, and fewer costs are incurred.”
Texas US District Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo agreed, explaining that even more time is wasted determining how other judges have responded to fake AI-generated citations.
“At one of the busiest court dockets in the nation, there are scant resources to spare ferreting out erroneous AI citations in the first place, let alone surveying the burgeoning caselaw on this subject,” she said.
At least one Florida court was “shocked, shocked” to find that a lawyer was refusing to pay what the other party’s attorneys said they were owed after misusing AI. The lawyer in that case, James Martin Paul, asked to pay less than a quarter of the fees and costs owed, arguing that Charlotin’s database showed he might otherwise owe penalties that “would be the largest sanctions paid out for the use of AI generative case law to date.”
But caving to Paul’s arguments “would only benefit serial hallucinators,” the Florida court found. Ultimately, Paul was sanctioned more than $85,000 for what the court said was “far more egregious” conduct than other offenders in the database, chastising him for “repeated, abusive, bad-faith conduct that cannot be recognized as legitimate legal practice and must be deterred.”
Paul did not immediately respond to Ars’ request to comment.
Michael B. Slade, a US bankruptcy judge in Illinois, seems to be done weighing excuses, calling on all lawyers to stop taking AI shortcuts that are burdening courts.
“At this point, to be blunt, any lawyer unaware that using generative AI platforms to do legal research is playing with fire is living in a cloud,” Slade wrote.
Source link



