In a recent legal case, U.S. District Judge Thomas T. Cullen decided against sanctioning attorney Thad M. Guyer for errors in an appellate brief generated using AI. While the brief included miscited cases, the judge deemed these mistakes as unintentional missteps rather than deliberate misconduct. During the show cause hearing, Guyer took full responsibility for the errors and made efforts to rectify the situation. The ruling highlights the challenges posed by generative AI in legal contexts, emphasizing accountability in the application of technology in law.
Mr. Guyer, to his credit, owned the mistake. He took sole responsibility, didn't try to blame [other] counsel involved, and immediately took steps to correct the issues that led to the erroneous case cites. ... This was a quirk. It's one of the downsides of generative AI.
Although the attorney, Thad M. Guyer, acknowledged using gen AI tools in preparing his appellate brief, U.S. District Judge Thomas T. Cullen characterized the citation errors as an 'honest mistake' rather than intentional misconduct.
Collection
[
|
...
]