AI Court Blunder Lawyer Sanctioned For ChatGPT Fiction

AI Tool Leads to Legal Trouble in Utah Court

The Utah Court of Appeals has sanctioned a lawyer, Richard Bednar, after discovering he used ChatGPT for a court filing. This filing notably included references to a court case that simply does not exist.

The decision to sanction Bednar came after it was found that a brief he filed contained these false citations. According to court documents, reviewed by ABC4, Bednar, along with another Utah-based lawyer Douglas Durbano (serving as petitioner’s counsel), had submitted a "timely petition for interlocutory appeal".

Nonexistent Cases and AI Generated Content Uncovered

Upon reviewing the brief, which had been drafted by a law clerk, the respondent's counsel identified several erroneous case citations. The counsel stated, "It appears that at least some portions of the Petition may be AI-generated, including citations and even quotations to at least one case that does not appear to exist in any legal database (and could only be found in ChatGPT and references to cases that are wholly unrelated to the referenced subject matter."

One glaring example highlighted was a reference to a case titled "Royer v Nelson," which could not be found in any legal database.

Lawyer Admits Error and Apologizes

Following the discovery of these fabrications, Bednar "acknowledged ‘the errors contained in the petition’ and apologized," as per a document from the Utah Court of Appeals. During an April hearing, Bednar and his attorney further admitted that "the petition contained fabricated legal authority, which was obtained from ChatGPT, and they accepted responsibility for the contents of the petition."

Related: ‘One day I overheard my boss saying: just put it in ChatGPT’: the workers who lost their jobs to AI

Bednar's defense stated that an "unlicensed law clerk," a law school graduate, had prepared the brief using the AI tool, and Bednar had failed to "independently check the accuracy" before filing. ABC4 reported that Durbano was not involved in drafting the petition, and the law clerk responsible was subsequently terminated from the law firm. Bednar also offered to cover any related attorney fees to "make amends."

Court Emphasizes Attorney Responsibility Despite AI

The Utah Court of Appeals, in a statement reported by ABC4, acknowledged the evolving nature of AI in legal work: "We agree that the use of AI in the preparation of pleadings is a legal research tool that will continue to evolve with advances in technology." However, the court strongly emphasized, "every attorney has an ongoing duty to review and ensure the accuracy of their court filings."

The court concluded that in this instance, "petitioner’s counsel fell short of their gatekeeping responsibilities as members of the Utah State Bar when they submitted a petition that contained fake precedent generated by ChatGPT."

Sanctions Imposed for AI Oversight Failure

As a result of the false citations, Bednar faced several penalties. ABC4 reports he was ordered to:

• Pay the respondent’s attorney fees for the petition and hearing.
• Refund fees to his client for the time spent preparing the erroneous filing and attending the hearing.
• Donate $1,000 to "And Justice for All," a Utah-based legal non-profit.

This case serves as a stark reminder to legal professionals about the critical importance of verifying AI-generated content before submitting it in official proceedings.