Lawyers Call 5th Circuit AI Proposal Vague, Potential Threat to Work-Product Privilege
The appeals court would require attorneys who used AI in drafting a filing to certify that the citations, legal analysis and any other text have "been reviewed for accuracy and approved by a human."
January 30, 2024 at 02:30 PM
5 minute read
What You Need to Know
- The Fifth Circuit published comments it received about its proposed AI review certification rule.
- Some attorneys said the rule lacked a clear definition of what generative AI uses would need to be disclosed.
Lawyers have expressed concern with a federal appeals court's proposed artificial intelligence review certification rule, calling it vague and a potential threat to work-product privilege.
More than a dozen attorneys or firms submitted comments to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit about its proposal to require lawyers to check a box confirming no generative AI program was used in drafting the filing, or if one was used, to certify that the citations, legal analysis and any other text have "been reviewed for accuracy and approved by a human."
This content has been archived.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 AllDoes the Treasury Hack Underscore a Big Problem for the Private Sector?
6 minute readAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
How Latham & Watkins Is Using Online Training to Expand the Legal Pipeline
9 minute readHow Many Legal Jobs Will be Affected by AI? Law Firms Can't Agree
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Two More Victims Alleged in New Sean Combs Sex Trafficking Indictment
- 2Jackson Lewis Leaders Discuss Firms Innovator Efforts, From Prompt-a-Thons to Gen AI Pilots
- 3Trump's DOJ Files Lawsuit Seeking to Block $14B Tech Merger
- 4'No Retributive Actions,' Kash Patel Pledges if Confirmed to FBI
- 5A Texas Lawyer Just Rose to the Trump Administration
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