Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 DECEMBER 2024

Trust, But Verify: Avoiding The Perils Of AI Hallucinations In Court

Baker Botts L.L.P.
Baker Botts L.L.P.
Contributor
Baker Botts L.L.P.

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Baker Botts is a leading international law firm with 11 offices located in the US, Europe, and the...

View firm profile
Explore more from Baker Botts L.L.P.

The rise of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents lawyers with powerful tools and tactical advantages to streamline many aspects of their practice.

United StatesTechnology

Introduction

The rise of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents lawyers with powerful tools and tactical advantages to streamline many aspects of their practice. AI helps lawyers provide more efficient, effective legal services to their clients. But lawyers must exercise caution when utilizing these new AI platforms to ensure they comply with their ethical obligations. A recent case from the Eastern District of Texas highlights a recurring ethical issue: litigators citing hallucinated case law generated by AI without verifying the accuracy (or even the existence) of the cases cited in a brief to the Court.

Judge Marcia Crose held that the lawyer's oversight breached his ethical obligations, including Rule 11(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Eastern District of Texas's Local Rule AT-3(b). The Court issued sanctions in the form of a $2,000 penalty and a directive to attend a continuing legal education course on using generative AI in

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from