Home » Business » Alabama Lawyer Faces Reprimand Over Fake AI Citations in Criminal Case

Alabama Lawyer Faces Reprimand Over Fake AI Citations in Criminal Case

by Priya Shah – Business Editor

Alabama Attorney Sanctioned for Submitting fabricated Citations Generated by AI

MONTGOMERY, Ala. – An Alabama attorney has been ⁣removed from ‍a financial fraud ⁢case after submitting a legal motion‍ containing citations generated by teh AI⁣ tool Ghostwriter Legal, which were later⁤ found to be entirely fabricated. U.S. District ​Judge Emily Moorer issued an order detailing the incident, calling the⁢ use of unchecked AI-generated​ legal research an ⁢”epidemic” within the legal community.

attorney Patrick Johnson​ apologized to the court, opposing counsel, ​adn his client, attributing the “embarrassing mistake” to ⁢”time⁣ pressure and ⁤tough personal circumstance.” Johnson explained in‍ a court response that⁤ he used Ghostwriter Legal ​to file a motion on July 3, after a pretrial conference in the case was unexpectedly moved ⁢up. He stated he typically⁣ uses Fastcase, a research ⁤tool provided by the Alabama State Bar, but⁢ was drawn ​to ‌the new program while ⁢working from a hospital​ out of⁣ state, where he was ‌attending to⁢ a family member recovering from surgery.

According to court ⁢documents, Johnson stated,⁣ “[W]hen I used⁣ Ghostwriter⁤ the idea that the search results, which looked authentic, could be fully made ‌up never even entered my mind.” He added he woudl “never make that mistake again,” nonetheless of whether it was due to his ‍own naiveté or misleading marketing from the company.

Counsel for the​ united‌ States noted the discrepancy ​between Johnson’s disclaimer ⁤of ChatGPT use and the fact that ⁢Ghostwriter Legal utilizes ChatGPT as its default AI program. Judge Moorer ultimately​ ruled⁢ that Johnson‌ was‌ responsible for verifying ⁤the⁢ accuracy ⁢of his citations, regardless of⁤ his awareness of the⁣ AI’s underlying technology.

“Simply put, the legal community is well aware of the⁣ dangers ‌and pitfalls‍ of⁢ using AI shortcuts without further review or supervision,” the order reads. While acknowledging AI’s potential as a legal tool, Moorer emphasized that lawyers remain accountable for all submissions to the court.⁤ “To⁢ be clear, ‌the‍ Court⁣ is not saying that AI has no place in the practise of‍ law…But in the same⁢ realm as supervising subordinate’s work or checking citations found indirectly,⁣ a ‍lawyer is absolutely responsible for the‍ citations and submissions to courts.”

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.