Flutterby™! : LLMs in law of the day

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

LLMs in law of the day

2025-12-22 19:15:27.683992+01 by Dan Lyke 1 comments

In the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi, Aberdeen Division : Thomas Billups Plaintiff v. Louisville Municipal School District Defendant — Civil Action No. 1:24- CV-74-SA-RP Sactions Order (PDF)

As of March 2025, Ms. Watson was on notice of her mistakes when an opposing attorney informed her directly that she had submitted a brief that contained misrepresentations of law. She was apparently then given an opportunity to fix the issue without consequence. Instead of learning from her mistake, she failed to change her ways and continued the same practice of not verifying AI output—only then, her conduct additionally violated the Firm’s policy prohibiting use of external AI tools.

As Eric Goldman ‪@ericgoldman.bsky.social‬ summarized

An attorney couldn't stop using Grok (?!) to help draft filings, producing "a flood of tainted filings" & apparently triggering the implosion of a law firm & 3 lawyers' careers 🤖😵 The court called her misconduct "particularly egregious & prolific"

and ‪Mike Masnick‬ ‪@mmasnick.bsky.social‬ observed:

Already unacceptable to use LLMs to draft filings and even worse, if you do, not to have checked the citations. But if you ARE going to do that, why of all LLMs out there would you use *GROK*?

And elsewhere: As more lawyers fall for AI hallucinations, ChatGPT says: Check my work, same article republished as How AI-driven hallucinatory filings are impacting Arizona courts

The AI Hallucination Cases database – maintained by Damien Charlotin, a researcher at HEC Paris, a leading business school in France – identifies a half-dozen federal court filings in Arizona since September 2024 that include fabricated material from ChatGPT or another generative AI tool.

Hopefully we'll start to see some real penalties for lawyers who outsource their work to the plausible bullshit generators.

[ related topics: Law Artificial Intelligence ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: LLMs in law of the day made: 2025-12-22 18:41:58.249343+01 by: spc476

Unfortunately, I think it'll take the public reaction when they learn that someone went free when they shouldn't, because of an LLM confabulation, and then goes on to commit another crime.

Add your own comment:




Format with:

(You should probably use "Text" mode: URLs will be mostly recognized and linked, _underscore quoted_ text is looked up in a glossary, _underscore quoted_ (http://xyz.pdq) becomes a link, without the link in the parenthesis it becomes a <cite> tag. All <cite>ed text will point to the Flutterby knowledge base. Two enters (ie: a blank line) gets you a new paragraph, special treatment for paragraphs that are manually indented or start with "#" (as in "#include" or "#!/usr/bin/perl"), "/* " or ">" (as in a quoted message) or look like lists, or within a paragraph you can use a number of HTML tags:

p, img, br, hr, a, sub, sup, tt, i, b, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, cite, em, strong, code, samp, kbd, pre, blockquote, address, ol, dl, ul, dt, dd, li, dir, menu, table, tr, td, th

Comment policy

We will not edit your comments. However, we may delete your comments, or cause them to be hidden behind another link, if we feel they detract from the conversation. Commercial plugs are fine, if they are relevant to the conversation, and if you don't try to pretend to be a consumer. Annoying endorsements will be deleted if you're lucky, if you're not a whole bunch of people smarter and more articulate than you will ridicule you, and we will leave such ridicule in place.

Flutterby™ is a trademark claimed by

Dan Lyke
for the web publications at www.flutterby.com and www.flutterby.net.