AI 'Hallucinations' in Legal Documents Raise Concerns for Lawyers
A recent incident involving the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in legal documents has sparked concerns within the legal community. U.S. personal injury law firm Morgan & Morgan issued a warning to its lawyers after a federal judge in Wyoming threatened to sanction two attorneys for including fake case citations in a lawsuit against Walmart. One lawyer admitted to using an AI program that "hallucinated" the cases, leading to what he described as an inadvertent mistake.
The trend of AI generating fictitious information in legal filings has caught the attention of courts nationwide, with at least seven cases in the past two years raising questions or resulting in disciplinary actions against lawyers. The case involving Walmart and Morgan & Morgan has brought to light the potential risks associated with AI technology in litigation.
Advancements in generative AI have enabled law firms to streamline research and drafting processes, with many firms either partnering with AI vendors or developing their own AI tools. Despite the efficiency gains, legal experts caution that generative AI can produce inaccurate information, termed as "hallucinations," due to the models generating responses based on statistical patterns rather than verified facts.
Legal professionals are required to verify and stand by the information in their court filings to avoid disciplinary actions. The American Bar Association has emphasised that lawyers are accountable for any inaccuracies, even if unintentionally produced through AI tools. Andrew Perlman, dean of Suffolk University's law school, highlighted the importance of maintaining competence when using AI tools in legal work.
In a notable case, a federal judge in Manhattan fined two New York lawyers for citing AI-invented cases in a personal injury lawsuit against an airline. Another instance involved Michael Cohen, former lawyer for Donald Trump, who mistakenly provided his attorney with fake case citations generated by Google's AI chatbot Bard in a criminal tax and campaign finance case.
The repercussions of using AI to fabricate legal references were evident in various cases, including a Texas lawyer being penalised for citing non-existent cases in a wrongful termination lawsuit and a misinformation expert losing credibility for unintentionally referencing AI-generated citations in a case involving a parody of Vice President Kamala Harris.
Harry Surden, a law professor at the University of Colorado, stressed the importance of legal professionals understanding the capabilities and limitations of AI tools. He noted that while the rise in AI-related errors highlights a lack of AI literacy in the legal field, mistakes in legal filings are not exclusive to the AI era.
AI-generated misinformation in legal filings raises concerns
Legal experts caution against reliance on AI without verification
Instances of disciplinary actions highlight the importance of AI literacy in the legal profession
Source: REUTERS