this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
717 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

63614 readers
3266 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
717
Judges Are Fed up With Lawyers Using AI That Hallucinate Court Cases (www.404media.co)
submitted 18 hours ago by some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
113 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

But the explanation and Ramirez’s promise to educate himself on the use of AI wasn’t enough, and the judge chided him for not doing his research before filing. “It is abundantly clear that Mr. Ramirez did not make the requisite reasonable inquiry into the law. Had he expended even minimal effort to do so, he would have discovered that the AI-generated cases do not exist. That the AI-generated excerpts appeared valid to Mr. Ramirez does not relieve him of his duty to conduct a reasonable inquiry,” Judge Dinsmore continued, before recommending that Ramirez be sanctioned for $15,000.

Falling victim to this a year or more after the first guy made headlines for the same is just stupidity.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 93 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Hold them in contempt. Put them in jail for a few days, then declare a mistrial due to incompetent counsel. For repeat offenders, file a formal complaint to the state bar.

[–] nthavoc@lemmy.today 18 points 11 hours ago

From the linked court document in the article: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.insd.215482/gov.uscourts.insd.215482.99.0.pdf?ref=404media.co

"For the reasons set forth above, the Undersigned, in his discretion, hereby RECOMMENDS that Mr. Ramirez be personally SANCTIONED in the amount of $15,000 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 for submitting to the Court and opposing counsel, on three separate occasions, briefs that contained citations to non-existent cases. In addition, the Undersigned REFERS the matter of Mr. Ramirez's misconduct in this case to the Chief Judge pursuant to Local Rule of Disciplinary Enforcement 2(a) for consideration of any further discipline that may be appropriate"

Mr. Ramirez is the dumbass lawyer that didn't check his dumbass AI. If you read above the paragraph I copied from, he gets laid into by the judge in writing to justify recommendation for sanctions and discipline. Good catch by the judge and the processes they have for this kind of thing.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 38 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Eh, they should file a complaint the first time, and the state bar can decide what to do about it.

[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee -5 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

"We have investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong"

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 22 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

The bar might get pretty ruthless for fake case citations.

[–] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 7 points 11 hours ago

I would hope that gross negligence and incompetence with come with severe consequences.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 10 points 11 hours ago

The state bar is not the state cops.