Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Judge Learns Lawyers on Both Sides of Case Used AI, Cancels Trial, Kicks Everyone Off the Case [View all]
https://www.404media.co/judge-learns-lawyers-on-both-sides-of-case-used-ai-cancels-trial-kicks-everyone-off-the-case/Problem?
https://removepaywalls.com/https://www.404media.co/judge-learns-lawyers-on-both-sides-of-case-used-ai-cancels-trial-kicks-everyone-off-the-case/
The lawyers on both sides of a federal court case in Mississippi were caught using artificial intelligence, a situation where, effectively, generative AI tools were used to argue against each other. The judge wrote in a blistering sanctions order, that the lawyers wasted the courts time, and that in an era of rampant unverified AI usage within the legal field, this case presents a prime example of the risk associated with serving as a rubber-stamp.
This case presents the Court with an unusual scenarioattorneys for both litigants engaged in similar sanctionable conduct, Sharion Aycock, senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of Mississippi wrote in a sanctions order. This court is yet again burdened with addressing AI hallucinations court filings.
The case in question involved a contractual dispute between lawyer Tom Withers and the city of Aberdeen, Mississippi, over apparently unpaid legal fees (Withers was not representing himself and was not sanctioned by the court). The case was first noticed by Rob Freund, a lawyer who frequently posts about cases involving AI hallucinations. Freund called it a comedy of AI errors, and suggested there were two clients who basically were paying for ChatGPT (or whatever LLM) to argue against itself.
404 Media has repeatedly covered the phenomenon of lawyers using AI to prepare their filings, and the specifics in this court case follow a similar pattern to what weve seen before: Lawyers for both sides cited nonexistent, hallucinated cases while making their arguments. The difference is that every lawyer involved in the case is implicated, leading Aycock to pause the proceedings, cancel the trial, and disqualify all four lawyers involved. Two of the lawyers were barred from appearing before the court for two years; all lawyers received a fine of between $1,000 and $3,500, depending on Aycocks assessment of their culpability for not verifying the outputs of the AI they used.
This case presents the Court with an unusual scenarioattorneys for both litigants engaged in similar sanctionable conduct, Sharion Aycock, senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of Mississippi wrote in a sanctions order. This court is yet again burdened with addressing AI hallucinations court filings.
The case in question involved a contractual dispute between lawyer Tom Withers and the city of Aberdeen, Mississippi, over apparently unpaid legal fees (Withers was not representing himself and was not sanctioned by the court). The case was first noticed by Rob Freund, a lawyer who frequently posts about cases involving AI hallucinations. Freund called it a comedy of AI errors, and suggested there were two clients who basically were paying for ChatGPT (or whatever LLM) to argue against itself.
404 Media has repeatedly covered the phenomenon of lawyers using AI to prepare their filings, and the specifics in this court case follow a similar pattern to what weve seen before: Lawyers for both sides cited nonexistent, hallucinated cases while making their arguments. The difference is that every lawyer involved in the case is implicated, leading Aycock to pause the proceedings, cancel the trial, and disqualify all four lawyers involved. Two of the lawyers were barred from appearing before the court for two years; all lawyers received a fine of between $1,000 and $3,500, depending on Aycocks assessment of their culpability for not verifying the outputs of the AI they used.
24 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Judge Learns Lawyers on Both Sides of Case Used AI, Cancels Trial, Kicks Everyone Off the Case [View all]
usonian
13 hrs ago
OP
Yes.. But if they are so cavalier as to use AI to prepare even the initial filing, perhaps their
hlthe2b
13 hrs ago
#8
Sigh. It was already obvious a few years ago that use of generative AI was dumbing users down and
highplainsdem
12 hrs ago
#14