Michael Cohen’s Lawyers Ordered to Produce Non-Existent Legal Cases
Lawyers representing former Trump attorney Michael Cohen have been instructed by a federal judge to provide copies of three legal cases cited in their motion to terminate his supervised release. However, it has been revealed that the cited cases do not exist, leading to speculation that AI may have been used to generate the motion or citations. The court has demanded a thorough explanation of how the attorneys’ motion referenced non-existent cases and whether Cohen was involved in drafting or reviewing the motion. Failure to produce the cited decisions may result in sanctions for the lawyers.
Judge Warns Submissions Are Considered Sworn Declarations
The federal judge emphasized that any submissions made by Cohen’s legal team are considered sworn declarations. Therefore, it is crucial for the attorneys to provide proof of the existence of the cited cases. U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman stated that a decision on Cohen’s motion would be postponed until evidence is provided. This requirement ensures transparency and accountability in legal proceedings.
AI-Generated Citations Raise Concerns
This incident raises concerns about the use of AI-generated content in legal documents. While the court filing did not explicitly mention AI, similar cases involving AI-generated content have emerged recently. In some instances, lawyers have relied on AI models such as ChatGPT for research, which resulted in fabricated information being included in court documents. These incidents highlight the need for attorneys to independently verify the details provided by AI systems before including them in legal filings.
Addressing AI Hallucinations and Inaccurate Outputs
OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, has taken steps to address AI hallucinations and inaccurate outputs. The company has hired red teams to test its AI models for vulnerabilities and improve their reliability. Additionally, Fetch AI and SingularityNET have announced a partnership to tackle AI hallucinations and the technology’s tendency to produce inaccurate or irrelevant outputs. SingularityNET is focused on neural-symbolic integration to overcome these challenges and believes that current AI models are limited in their capabilities.
Hot Take: Ensuring Accuracy in AI-Generated Legal Content
The recent case involving Michael Cohen’s lawyers highlights the importance of verifying information sourced from AI systems in legal proceedings. While AI can be a valuable tool for legal research, it is crucial for attorneys to independently fact-check and validate the content generated by AI models. Failure to do so can lead to serious consequences, including the inclusion of false information in court documents. To ensure accuracy and maintain the integrity of the legal system, lawyers should exercise caution when relying on AI-generated content and take responsibility for independently verifying its accuracy.
By
By
By
By
By