A “Brief” Hallucination by Generative AI Can Land You in Hot Water

In a recent personal injury case, a New York attorney learned a hard lesson about the risks of using "generative" artificial intelligence (AI). The attorney, representing Robert Mata, filed a response to a motion to dismiss which cited several cases in Mata's favor. However, it was soon discovered that none of the cited cases actually existed. Avianca, the opposing party, brought this to the court's attention, resulting in an order for Mata's attorney to provide copies of the cases. Eventually, it was revealed that the attorney had used an AI website called Chat GPT to supplement his legal research, and the AI had provided non-existent cases. The court issued Orders to Show Cause, questioning why the attorney should not be sanctioned. This case highlights the need for attorneys to be cautious when using generative AI and to verify the accuracy of its output before filing.

Read the full article here: https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/us/insights/alerts/brief-hallucination-generative-ai-can-land-you-hot-water

Click to learn more about our authoring attorneys

• Chris Mammen (Bio | LinkedIn)
• Jill Rothstein (Bio | LinkedIn)
• James Dority (Bio | LinkedIn)

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Welcome to Womble Perspectives, where we explore a wide range of topics, from the latest legal updates to industry trends to the business of law. Our team of lawyers, professionals and occasional outside guests will take you through the most pressing issues facing businesses today and provide practical and actionable advice to help you navigate the ever changing legal landscape.

With a focus on innovation, collaboration and client service. We are committed to delivering exceptional value to our clients and to the communities we serve. And now our latest episode.

In a recent personal injury case, an attorney in New York experienced the pitfalls of "generative" AI, learning a valuable lesson along the way. The attorney, representing Robert Mata in a lawsuit against airline Avianca, filed a motion to dismiss the case. However, it was later discovered that the attorney had cited nonexistent cases in Mata's response to the motion. 

Avianca's attorneys brought this issue to the court's attention, leading the court to demand copies of the supposedly cited cases. The attorney complied but raised suspicions about their authenticity. The court issued an Order to Show Cause, expressing concern over the submission of fake judicial decisions and questioning the attorney's actions. 

In an affidavit, another attorney from the same law firm explained that he had used an artificial intelligence website called Chat GPT to assist with legal research. Screenshots of the attorney's conversation with ChatGPT were provided, indicating that the AI had claimed the cases were real and could be found in reputable legal databases. However, the court was not convinced by this explanation and issued a second Order to Show Cause, this time targeting both the attorney personally and the law firm for potential sanctions. 

The case has garnered significant attention in the media, with publications like The New York Times and CNN covering the story. As a result, at least one court has implemented a new standing order, requiring mandatory certification regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence in filings. The order emphasizes the need for human verification and accuracy checks. 

Similar incidents involving generative AI have also been reported in the United Kingdom, prompting a broader discussion on the ethical implications and best practices surrounding its use in the legal field. 

This situation serves as a reminder of several long-standing ethical rules and best practices. Attorneys are urged to stay informed about the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, as outlined in the Duty of Competence. Additionally, the duty of supervision applies to lawyers overseeing the work of others, including non-lawyers utilizing generative AI tools. Maintaining client confidentiality and diligently cite-checking before filing are also emphasized as essential practices to prevent such episodes. 

Thank you for listening to Womble Perspectives. If you want to learn more about the topics discussed in this episode, please visit The Show Notes, where you can find links to related resources mentioned today. The Show Notes also have more information about our attorneys who provided today's insights, including ways to reach out to them.

Don't forget to subscribe via your podcast player of choice so that you never miss an episode. Thank you again for listening.