Who's Submitting AI-Tainted Filings in Court?

15 pointsposted 4 hours ago
by cratermoon
(cyberlaw.stanford.edu)

4 Comments

cortesoft

15 minutes ago

The article didn’t include any numbers on what the general lawyer population is compared to the results.

For example, they make the claim that solo and small firms are the most likely to file AI hallucinations because they represent 50% and 40% of the instances of legal briefs with hallucinations. However, without the base rate for briefs files by solo or small firms compare to larger firms, we don’t know if that is unusual or not. If 50% of briefs were files by solo firms and 40% were filed by small firms, then the data would actually be showing that firm size doesn’t matter.

Animats

2 hours ago

Answer: Solo practitioners and pro-se litigants.

ronsor

an hour ago

> Pro-se litigants

I wonder when we're going to see an AI-powered "Online Court Case Wizard" that lets you do lawsuits like installing Windows software.

landl0rd

35 minutes ago

Her balance was $47,892 when she woke up. By lunch it was $31,019. Her defense AI had done what it could. Morning yawn: emotional labor, damages pain and suffering. Her glance at the barista: rude, damages pain and suffering. Failure to smile at three separate pedestrians. All detected and filed by people's wearables and AI lawyers, arbitrated automatically.

The old courthouse had been converted to server rooms six months ago. The last human lawyer was just telling her so. Then his wearable pinged (unsolicited legal advice, possible tort) and he walked away mid-sentence. That afternoon, she glimpsed her neighbor watering his garden. They hadn't made eye contact since July. The liability was too great.

By evening she was up to $34k. Someone, somewhere, had caused her pain and suffering. She sat on her porch not looking at anything in particular. Her wearable chimed every few seconds.