By now, the story of two New York attorneys facing scrutiny for citing nonexistent cases generated by the artificial intelligence (“AI”) tool ChatGPT has made national (and international) headlines. Late last month, a federal judge in the Southern District of New York sanctioned the attorneys and their firm $5,000. The court’s decision (Roberto Mata v. Avianca, Inc., No. 22-cv-1461-PKC (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2023) (ECF No. 54)) provides a humbling reminder of both an attorney’s responsibilities in ensuring the accuracy of his or her filings, and the limits of certain technologies in the legal profession.
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- To Some, It’s About ERISA—to Everyone, It’s About Not Having to Plead Affirmative Defenses - SCOTUS Today
- Deportation Ruling Highlights a Potential Separation-of-Powers Clash - SCOTUS Today
- Another Win for the Administration, at Least for Now - SCOTUS Today
- When Is a TRO Treatable as a Preliminary Injunction? - SCOTUS Today
- Court Sides with RICO Complainant Who Received Tainted Medical Marijuana and with FDA on Regulating E-Cigarettes - SCOTUS Today