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
- Term Begins with Easy Unanimity, a Condition Soon to Be Forgotten - SCOTUS Today
- Service and Justice: Veterans in Law – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast
- Sixth Circuit Says It Again: Outside Counsel’s Internal Investigations Are Privileged and Protected from Disclosure
- Eleventh Circuit Allows Qui Tam Relators to Avoid Complaint Dismissal by Using Information Obtained in Discovery
- EDPA Strengthens Its Approach to White-Collar Enforcement