New York lawyers fined for using bogus ChatGPT cases in briefs. Two New York lawyers who submitted a legal brief using six ChatGPT-generated case citations were sanctioned by a U.S. judge on Thursday.
Judge P. Kevin Castel in Manhattan fined lawyers Steven Schwartz, Peter LoDuca, and Levidow, Levidow & Oberman $5,000.
The judge determined the lawyers committed “acts of conscious avoidance and false and misleading statements to the court.”
On Thursday, Levidow, Levidow & Oberman’s lawyers “respectfully” disagreed with the court’s finding of bad faith.
“We made a good faith mistake in failing to believe that a piece of technology could be making up cases out of whole cloth,” the firm claimed.
Schwartz’s attorneys declined to comment. LoDuca’s lawyer said they’re analyzing the ruling, and he didn’t respond.
Schwartz admitted in May that he utilized ChatGPT to research the brief in a client’s personal injury case against Colombian airline Avianca (AVT_p.CN) and unintentionally included the fake citations. Schwartz’s brief listed only LoDuca.
Avianca’s lawyers informed the court that they could not find several briefcases in March.
On Thursday, Avianca lawyer Bart Banino claimed the court’s dismissal of the personal injury action was the “right conclusion” regardless of the lawyers’ use of ChatGPT. The judge granted Avianca’s late move to dismiss.
In Thursday’s penalties judgment, the court stated there is nothing “inherently improper” about lawyers utilizing AI “for assistance.” Still, lawyer ethics regulations “impose a gatekeeping role on attorneys to ensure the accuracy of their filings.”
The judge added the lawyers “continued to stand by the fake opinions” despite the court and airline questioning their existence. His order required lawyers to notify the real judges who wrote the bogus cases of the penalties.
Comment Template