#LegalEthics Tidbit: If you are going to let #AI draft your brief, aren’t you sort of eliminating your own job?

An IN attorney submitted a brief with a half a dozen or so citations fabricated by #AI. He indicated that he turned to AI when he was overwhelmed with his case load and couldn’t afford LEXIS anymore. The lawyer sincerely apologized and was fined $10,000 by the judge, who took the opportunity to opine on the abdication of legal work to machines: …(cont.)

https://lnkd.in/eqC7yxMj
#law

LinkedIn

This link will take you to a page that’s not on LinkedIn

… “One would expect that, when individuals choose this profession, they do so in part because they believe they have some talent for the work. One would expect that, after several years of law school, and more years of practice, those attorneys believe they bring some level of value to their clients beyond that of a machine. Yet these situations represent an abdication of … (cont.)
…those personal and professional responsibilities to those very machines, which to date have not proven themselves up to the task. While the Undersigned has long recognized the value of the proper and efficient use of technology, my confidence in the profession and the generations of lawyers who have shaped it prevents me from believing that it can ever be replaced by a machine, no matter how advanced. However, the preservation of that profession requires ever increasing levels of … (cont.)
…diligence and vigilance from each and every attorney and judge involved in the process. Absent that, someday clients may well be better off accepting advice from a machine as opposed to a careless and inattentive attorney. That is a day the profession of law must not allow to come to pass.”