Reading time: 7 minutes

A growing trend in the legal world is forcing law firms to confront the ethical risks of implementing new technology. Across the country, judges are beginning to sanction and reprimand attorneys for submitting court documents containing what are known as "AI hallucinations,” fabricated information, non-existent case citations, erroneous claims, and made-up legal precedents generated by artificial intelligence tools. These incidents are a stark reminder that while technology can be a powerful asset, it is no substitute for human diligence and professional responsibility.

New Examples of AI-Related Misconduct in the Courtrooms

In a recent case in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, a relator’s legal team faces sanctions and disqualification after an expert witness’s report was found to be replete with such AI-generated falsehoods. The expert, who admitted to using a generative AI tool to assist in his research, included fake citations and fabricated testimony in his report. The anesthesiologists’ lawyers contend that the blatant nature of the mistakes demonstrates the attorneys were guilty of “willful blindness.” This powerful legal term implies that the lawyers had a duty to know what was in the documents they submitted and that their failure to do so was a breach of that duty. Nancy Moore, an expert in legal ethics and a former chief reporter to the American Bar Association's Commission on Evaluation of Professional Rules of Conduct has affirmed that the actions of the relator's legal team represent a serious ethical breach. The expert concluded that the conduct was egregious and violated several rules of professional conduct. Moore's opinion further states that lawyers have a duty of candor to the court, which includes not knowingly or recklessly submitting false statements or evidence. The expert believes that disqualification is a warranted sanction, especially given the pattern of statements that appear to have been made knowingly or recklessly.

While the legal team sought to withdraw the expert and their problematic report, the court permitted the withdrawal but did not dismiss the issue. The defendants proceeded to file a motion for sanctions, requesting the court to disqualify the opposing counsel and seek to recover attorney fees and costs associated with the deposition and the motion to exclude the report.

“The liability for using these new technologies without proper supervision falls squarely on the attorney. AI is a powerful tool, but it lacks professional judgment and a duty of candor to the court. Attorneys must remain the final check, or they will be held accountable for the errors it produces.”

— Bryan Rotella, Founder & Managing Partner, LeadAI Legal™

This incident is not an isolated case. The legal community is now facing a new reality: it must adapt to the new digital landscape with a transparent commitment to integrity. The foundational principles of ethics must be kept within a scope throughout these evolving times. The use of AI in legal practice requires a new level of scrutiny and a renewed focus on fundamental verification practices.

Lawyers are the final line of defense against misinformation in the courtroom, and this responsibility cannot be outsourced to an algorithm. As the legal profession embraces these new tools, the importance of human judgment, meticulous review, and ethical conduct is greater than ever.

QPWB remains at the forefront of innovation while staying firmly rooted in the ethical processes and foundational principles that ensure an effective, transparent, and responsible defense for our clients. While we recognize the transformative potential of artificial intelligence, we are more aware of the significant liabilities that accompany its improper use. Our firm’s core philosophy is built on the essence of hard work and a meticulous, responsible approach to every case. 

Key Takeaways

• The Responsibility of Verification: Attorneys have a professional and ethical duty to verify the accuracy of all documents and information submitted to the court, regardless of whether that information originated from a human expert or an AI tool
• The Peril of "Willful Blindness": Judges are taking a harsh view of attorneys who fail to spot obvious errors. The argument of "willful blindness" is being used to justify serious sanctions, including disqualification from cases
• AI Is Only a Tool: Generative AI is a powerful tool for research and drafting, but it can "hallucinate" and create false information. It should be used as a supplement to, not a replacement for, human expertise and due diligence
• The Stakes Are High: The consequences for filing AI-generated falsehoods are severe, ranging from monetary penalties to public reprimands and disqualification from a case

This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult with an attorney to discuss your specific legal situation.