The legal world is grappling with a new challenge: Artificial Intelligence. Recent headlines have repeatedly featured lawyers facing sanctions for submitting court documents containing “bogus AI-generated research” – cases and citations that simply don’t exist.
Why are legal professionals, despite the clear risks, increasingly turning to AI tools like ChatGPT for assistance? The answer often boils down to intense time pressures and the pervasive integration of AI into nearly every sector, including legal research databases like LexisNexis and Westlaw. Many attorneys, juggling heavy caseloads, see AI as an incredibly efficient assistant, though some may not fully grasp how these large language models (LLMs) operate. As one sanctioned attorney famously put it, he believed ChatGPT was a “super search engine,” only to discover it could generate convincingly phrased nonsense.
While some experts, like Suffolk University Law School Dean Andrew Perlman, argue that instances of “hallucination” are outliers and that AI offers “enormous possible benefits” for legal services, the evidence of errors is mounting. High-profile cases, including those involving a journalist and major tech companies, have seen filings riddled with fake citations, leading to judges striking motions and issuing reprimands.
The American Bar Association (ABA) has now issued guidance, emphasizing lawyers’ “duty of competence” in understanding the benefits and risks of generative AI. This includes the crucial need to verify all AI-produced work and consider client confidentiality.
The future of AI in law remains a topic of debate. While some foresee AI becoming an indispensable tool that lawyers will be expected to master, others remain skeptical, warning against outsourcing critical research without rigorous verification.
Read the full story to understand the implications of AI in legal practice, the cases that have drawn attention, and what experts say about navigating this transformative technology.
Read full article here:
Add Comment