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
- Eleventh Circuit Clarifies: Discovery Materials Can Be Used to Meet Rule 9(b)
- Biometric Backlash: The Rising Wave of Litigation Under BIPA and Beyond
- Tasked with Troubling Content: AI Model Training and Workplace Implications
- Extraterritorial Application of the DTSA: Recent Decision Continues to Develop “Act in Furtherance” Element
- Shielding Reproductive Freedom: Uncovering New York’s Law Protecting Providers from Civil and Criminal Liability