Tag: Sanctions

Using AI for legal research can improve efficiency and accuracy, but it should not replace human judgment. Lawyers must exercise due diligence and critical thinking skills to verify information for accuracy and relevance. Recent sanctions against a law firm were due to the failure of lawyers to thoroughly review information provided by the ChatGPT AI application.

Lawyers for a passenger lawsuit against Avianca relied on an AI chatbot for research, but the bot cited bogus legal cases. Judge Castel summoned the lawyers for a hearing after noticing the citations were false. Chatbots may not always be reliable sources of factual information.

A lawyer's reliance on artificial intelligence software ChatGPT proved problematic, with fake court cases and quotes in the legal brief. This case highlights the need for validating AI outputs. The affected legal firm now stresses this point in its AI training, and the case has become a topic of conversation in the legal world. The lawyer involved threw himself on the mercy of the court, stating that he did not know the content could be fake.

Attorney Steven Schwartz of law firm Levidow, Levidow and Oberman faced consequences for using ChatGPT to generate a false brief during a case against the Columbian airline Avianca. As a result, a hearing was scheduled to discuss the sanctions and OpenAI’s program sparked of fear among the professions. Read on to learn more about this legal case.

ChatGPT generates copy from prompt, sometimes containing inaccurate information. Learn of a NY lawyer facing sanctions for submitting false court decisions he generated with AI. Levidow, Levidow & Oberman attorney also facing sanctions. Could this happen to you?