In a recent case, three attorneys from Butler Snow received public reprimands and were disqualified for fabricating citations, purportedly using AI. The court distinguished their responsibility from that of associates, who were not punished. This case reflects a trend where AI generates false citations to support legal arguments. Judge Anna Manasco dismissed the defense that no one was misled, emphasizing that using bogus authorities still caused significant harm. The ruling suggests a shift towards accountability for misconduct in the legal profession, particularly regarding emerging AI usage.
When the dust settled, three attorneys - two partners and an of counsel - earned a public reprimand, got disqualified from the case, and referred to the state bar.
A new trend in AI hallucination cases is the 'wrong case, right law' phenomenon, as algorithms invent fake captions to support otherwise correct statements of law.
Judge Manasco is unpersuaded by the argument that no one was misled, rejecting the notion that the bogus authorities redeem the harm caused.
The court's decision demonstrates accountability within legal practice, distinguishing between the culpability of senior partners and the innocence of the junior associates.
Collection
[
|
...
]