Ethical Considerations for Litigators Navigating the Artificial Intelligence Landscape
With AI, the ability to drive massively greater levels of productivity is within reach, but there are risks if the technology is not used properly.
February 16, 2024 at 09:53 AM
8 minute read
As is often the case with disruptive technologies, the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has outpaced our ability to regulate it. Predictably, this has led to some cautionary examples of ill-considered use of AI.
For instance, a Colorado attorney's use of generative AI to prepare a motion to set aside summary judgment led to an embarrassing—and potentially career-threatening—result. The attorney did not cite-check the cases cited by ChatGPT, and it turns out that many of the cases either did not exist or did not stand for the propositions cited. Ultimately, the judge denied the motion and threatened to file a complaint against the attorney for making material misrepresentations of law.
This example is not unique as stories have emerged of similar errors in AI-generated legal motions filed without appropriate attorney review. Sensing a potential tidal wave of AI-generated motions and briefs containing egregious errors, some judges have taken proactive measures to stem the tide. Brantley Starr, a federal judge in the Northern District of Texas, issued a requirement that all attorneys appearing before him must file on the docket a certificate attesting either that no portion of any filing will be drafted by generative AI or that any language drafted by generative AI will be checked for accuracy—using print reporters or traditional legal databases—by a human being.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
- 2Lack of Jurisdiction Dooms Child Sex Abuse Claim Against Archdiocese of Philadelphia, says NJ Supreme Court
- 3DC Lawsuits Seek to Prevent Mass Firings and Public Naming of FBI Agents
- 4Growth of California Firms Exceeded Expectations, Survey of Managing Partners Says
- 5Blank Rome Adds Life Sciences Trio From Reed Smith
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
