GAI Goes to Court

You are in business and you are sued.  Why pay high lawyer rates?  Go to Chatbox and hire a lawyer that is free (well, you are paying $20 a months for the Chatbox, but that is somewhat less than for example my hourly rate).

Some lawyers experimented with this idea.  I mean, we lawyers knew that GAI was going to replace some assistants and perhaps some paralegals, but when we thought that GAI was coming for our own jobs we got nervous.

Here is the good news: lawyers are safe.  A couple of experiences:

  1. GAI, please write me a pleading to file in court about XYZ.  Result: a term paper describing what XYZ is.
  2. GAI, please write a court filing which case citations I can file in court.  Result: a filing in proper form, proper heading, etc.  Uh, wait– the cases were made up.  That’s right, they did not exist. This is called hallucinating.

Using GAI by lawyers today run high risk of violating the Rules of Professional Conduct (putting aside that you the client will lose your case).  Lawyers must be competent (fake cases are a no-no.)  Lawyers must maintain client confidentiality (can’t put client information into a system  based on an AI prompt where it can become part of what the system learns and uses for, and discloses to, others).  Lawyers are expressly responsible for the product obtained from delegated sources–the buck stops at the lawyer level even if it is a systems error.

BTW: This is an actual case.  The attorney who submitted the pleading is now facing disciplinary proceedents.

Note: there was speculation that people appearing in lower courts without a lawyer might plug in an earpiece, GAI would hear the proceedings and tell the person what to say or do. Aside from inaccuracy, is this un-athorized practice of law?  If so, by whom?

Comments are closed.