How a Simple Tort Claim is Transformed into an Exposition of the Implications of Artificial Intelligence on the American Legal System
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.107.15075Keywords:
Artificial intelligence (AI), Montreal Convention, sanctions, Chat GPT, 12(b)(6) motion, fabricated research, promptsAbstract
This article discusses issues relating to artificial intelligence (AI) in the context of a lawsuit essentially alleging negligence. The case, however, quickly turned to a discussion relating to how the plaintiff’s attorneys, with the aid of ChatGPT, fabricated as series of precedents that would have permitted their case to go forward on the basis of the application of a statute of limitations found in the Montreal Convention. The article discusses AI as it applies to the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rule 11 of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure relating to the duties and responsibilities of attorneys. All of the quotations and factual representations are taken from the Case Documentations.
References
American Bar Association (2019), Resolution 112, https://www.americanbar.org/news/reporter_resources/annual-meeting-2019/house-of-delegatesresolutions/112/
Armstrong, K. (2023). ChatGPT: US lawyer admits using AI for case research. BBC News (May 27, 2023), https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65735769.amp
Bernstein, A. (2019). Mending the gaps in lawyers’ rules of professional conduct. Oklahoma Law Review, 72(1):
Bonifacic, I. (2023). A lawyer faces sanctions after he used ChatGPT to write a brief riddled with fake citations. engadget.com (May 28, 2023), https://www.engadget.com/a-lawyer-faces-sanctions-after-he-usedchatgpt-to-write-a-brief-riddled-with-fake-citations-175720636.html
Carrel, A. (2019). Legal intelligence through artificial intelligence requires emotional intelligence: A new competency model for the 21st century legal professional. Georgia State University Law Review, 35: 1153-1183.
Clermont, K.M. (2016). Res judicata as requisite for justice. Rutgers Law Review, 68: 1067-1141.
Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (1999) (Montreal Convention). T.I.A.S. 13038, 2242 U.N.T.S. 350, https://2009-2017.state.gov/e/eb/ris/othr/ata/115157.htm (accessed July 2, 2023).
Cyphert, AB. (2021). A human being wrote this law review article: GPT-3 and the practice of law. University of California Davis Law Review, 55: 401-443.
Davis, A. (2020). The future of law firms (and lawyers) in the age of artificial intelligence. Revista Direito GV, 16(1): 1-12.
Deeks, A. (2019). The judicial demand for explainable artificial intelligence. Columbia Law Review, 119(7): 1829-1850.
DeLeon, P.M. & Eyskens, W. (2001). The Montreal Convention: Analysis of some aspects of the attempted modernization and consolidation of the Warsaw system. Journal of Air Law and Commerce, 66: 1155-1185.
Delfino, R. (2023). The deepfake defense—Exploring the limits of the law and ethical norms in protecting legal proceedings from lying lawyers. Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, Legal Studies Research Paper 2023-02, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4355140
Eapen, T.T., Finkenstadt, D.J., Folk, J., & Venkataswamy, L. (2023). How generative AI can augment human creativity. Harvard Business Review (July-August 2023), https://www.store.hbr.org/product/the-innovator-sdna-mastering-the-five-skills-of-disruptive-innovators/14946?sku=14946-HBK-ENG
Edwards, B. (2022). No Linux? No problem. Just go get AI to hallucinate for you. Ars Technica (December 5, 2022), https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/12/openais-new-chatbox-can-hallucinate-alinux-shell-or-calling-a=bbs
Endicott, A. (2023). Could it be unethical not to use AI? Arnold & Porter (Relativity Blog) (January 5, 2023), https//www.relativity.com/blog/could-it-be-unethical-not-to-use-ai/#.
Felzmann, H., Villaronga, E.F., Lutz, C., & Tamo-Larrieux, A. (2019). Transparency you can trust: Transparency requirements for artificial intelligence between legal norms and contextual concerns. Big Data & Society: 1-14.
Fennema, G. (2022). A beginner’s guide to chatboxes. Capacity (October 18, 2022), https://capacity.com/learn/chatbox/
Floyd, D.H. (1995). Candor versus advocacy. Court’s use of sanctions to enforce the duty of candor toward the tribunal. Georgia Law Review, 29(4): 1035-1074.
Fox, E.J. (2015). Sam Altman on his plan to keep A.I. out of the hands of the “bad guys.” Vanity Fair (December 15, 2015), https://www.vanityfair.com/2015/12/sam-altman-elon-musk-openai
Gregg, E.M., Koch, B., & Smith, D.W. (2019), How artificial intelligence is impacting litigators. ALAS Los Prevention Journal, Summer 2019: 48-59.
Grenardo, D.A. (2019). A lesson in civility. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, 32: 135-175. 167
Hamabe, Y. (1993). Functions of Rule 12(b)(6) in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: A categorization approach. Campbell Law Review, 15(2): 119-205.
Heilwell, R. (2022). AI is finally good at stuff, and that’s a problem. Vox (December 7, 2022), https://www.vox.com/recode/2022/12/7/23498694/ai-artificial-intelligence-chat-gpt-openai
Jefferson, R.K. et al. (2020). Professional responsibility: A contemporary approach. West Academic Publishing: St. Paul, Minn.
Jones, D.N. (2023). What are the ethics for using AI to write briefs? The Daily Docket (Newsletter by Reuters and Westlaw) (May 31, 2023), The Daily Docket, https://newslink.reuters.com/public/31644939
Linna, D.W. (2021). Evaluating artificial intelligence for legal services: Can “soft law” lead to enforceable standards for effectiveness? Technology and Society Magazine, 40(4): 37-51.
Marrero, V. (2018). Mission to dismiss: A dismissal of Rule 12(b)(6) and the retirement of Twombly/Iqbal. Cardozo Law Review, 40(1): 1-33, https://cardozolawreview/category/volume-40/) Issue1
Merken, S. (2023). New York lawyers sanctioned for using fake Chat GPT cases in legal brief. Reuters (June 26, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/legal/new-york-lawyers-sanctioned-using-fake-chatgpt-cases-legal-brief-2023-06-22/
Model Rules of Professional Conduct (1988). American Bar Association, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/model_rules_of_professional_conduct (accessed July 2, 2022).
Moore, P.H. (2012), An updated quantitative study of Iqbal’s impact on 12(b)(6) motions. University of Richmond Law Review, 46: 603-657.
Murphy, J.F. (1986). The automatic stay in bankruptcy. Cleveland State Law Review, 34: 567-635.
Nelson, S.D. & Simek, J.W. (2020). The ABA tackles artificial intelligence and ethics. Sensei Enterprises, 48 Law Practitioners, senseint.com (accessed June 28, 2023).
Oliveto, A.M. (2022). Revisiting the liability system of the Montreal Convention of 1999. Issues in Aviation Law and Policy, 21: 177-204.
Open AI (2023). Introducing open AI. OpenAI.com, https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai (accessed June 28, 2023).
Preston, C.B. (2018). Lawyers’ abuse of technology. Cornell Law Review, 103(4): 879-976.
Reich, A. (2022). ChatGPT: What is the new free AI chatbox? - Explainer. Business Innovation (December 27, 2022), https://www.jpost.com/business-and-innovation/tech-and-start-ups/article-725910
Reiser, G. (2016). Revisiting the standards to dismiss a complaint in federal court for failure to state a claim. Njlawconnect.com (April 29, 2016), https://njlawconnect.com/motion-to-dismiss-complaint-rule-12b6-newjersey-federal-court/
Rider, E. (2023). How ChatGPT will dramatically change the influencer space. Entrepreneur (April 6, 2023), https://www.entrepreneur.com/science-technology/how-chatgpt-will-dramatically-change-theinfluencer-space/448386
Ruan, M. (2021). Attorney competence in the algorithm age. American Bar Association Journal of Labor and Employment Law, 35: 317-338.
Russell, J. (2023). Sanctions ordered for lawyer who relied on ChatGPT artificial intelligence to prepare court brief. Courthouse News Service (June25, 2023), https://www.courthousenews.com/sanctions-ordered-for-lawyers-who-relied-on-chatgpt-artificial-intelligenceto-prepare-court-brief/
Schwartz, M. (2022). Establishing an unqualified standard for removal under 28 U.S.C. Section 1441: The propriety of removing maritime cases to Federal court. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 55: 29-62.
Shin, R. (2023). Humiliated lawyers fined $5,000 for submitting ChatGPT hallucinations in court: ‘I heard about this new site, which I falsely assumed was, like, a super search engine.’ Fortune (June 23, 2023), https://finance.yahoo.com/news/humiliated-lawyers-fined-5-000-164109050.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall
Shope, M.L. (2021). Lawyer and judicial competency in the era of artificial intelligence: Ethical requirements for documenting datasets and machine learning models. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, 34(1): 191-222.
Sirica, A. (2010). The new federal pleading standard: Ashcroft v. Iqbal. Florida Law Review, 62(2): 547-557.
Stefanowicz, B. (2023). 12 best AI chatbots for business & personal use. Tidio.com (May 10, 2023), https://www.tidio.com/blog/ai-chatbox/
Stone, A.B/ (2023). What is a pleading? Legalvision.com (May 10, 2023), https://lehalvision.com.au/what-is-apleading/
Stewart, A. (2015). The Montreal Convention’s statute of limitations- A failed attempt at consistency. Journal of Air Law and Commerce, 80(1): 267-275.
Times of India (2023). Open AI, the company behind ChatGPT: What all it does, how it started and more. Times of India (January 25, 2023), https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/gadgets-news/openai-the-company-behindchatgpt-what-all-it-does-how-it-started-and-more/articlesshow/9729702
Tung, L. (2023). ChatGPT can write code. Now researchers say it’s good at fixing bugs, too. ZDNET (January 26, 2023), https://www.zdnet.com/article/chatgpt-can-write-code-now-researchers-say-its-good-at-fixing-bugstoo/
Vairo, G. (1998). Rule 11 and the profession. Fordham Law Review, 67(2): 589-648.
Warsaw Convention (1929). Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage by Air, Oct. 12, 1929, 49 Stat. 3000, 137 L.N.T.S. 11.
Wendel, W. (2020/2021). The regulatory perspective and systems thinking in legal ethics. Gonzaga Law Review, 56(2): 243-258.
Case Documentation Case 1:22-cv-01461-PKC, Document 31. Order to Show Cause 2023)
Case 1:22-cv-01461-PKC, Document 32-1. Affidavit (2023)
Case 1:22-cv-01461-PKC, Document 54. Opinion and Order on Sanctions (2023)
Case 1:22-cv-01461-PKC, Document 55. Opinion and Order (2023)
Case Citations A.D. v Azar (2019). 925 F.3d 1291 (United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit)
Advanced Cardiovascular Sys., Inc. v. SciMed Life Sys. (1993). 988 F.2d 1157 (United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal (2009). 556 U.S. 662 (United States Supreme Court)
Cohen v. American Airlines, Inc. (2021). 13 F.4th 240 (United States Court of Appeals for the 2d Circuit)
Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx (1990). 496 U.S. 384 (United States Supreme Court)
Fishman by Fishman v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. (1998). 132 F.3d 138 (United States Court of Appeals for the 2d th
George Cornea v. U.S. Attorney General, et al. (2019). No. 18-14326 (United States Court of Appeals for the 11
Gibbs v. Maxwell House (1984). 738 F.2d 1153 (United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit)
Gross v. German Found Indus. Initiative (2008). 320 F. Supp. 2d 235 (United States District Court of N.J.)
In re Burlington Coat Factory (1997). 114 F.3d 1410 (United States Court of Appeals for the 3d Circuit)
In re 60 E. 80th St. Equities, Inc. (2000). 218 F.3d 109 (United States Court of Appeals for the 2d Circuit)
Mata v. Avianca. Inc. (2023), 22-cv-1461 (PKC) (United States District Court for the Southern District of New York)
Miccosukee Tribe v. United States (2008). 516 F.3d 1235 (United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit)
Muhammad v. Walmart Stores East, L.P. (2013). 732 F.3d 104 (United States Court of Appeals for the 2d Circuit)
Parkcentral Global Hub Ltd. v. Porsche Auto. Holdings SE (2014). 763 F.3d 198 (Court of Appeals for the 2d
PBGC v. White Consolidated Industries, Inc. (1993). 998 F.2d 1192 (United States Court of Appeals for the 3d
Rycoline Products, Inc. v. CW Unlimited (1997). 109 F.3d 883 (United States Court of Appeals for the 3d Circuit)
Salovaara v. Eckert. (2000). 22 F.3d 19 (United States Court of Appeals for the 2d Circuit)
Storey v. Cello Holdings, L.L.C. (2003). 347 F.3d 370 (United States Court of Appeals for the 2d Circuit)
United States v. Fernandez (2013). 722 F.3d 1 (United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit)
Weddington v. Sentry Indus., Inc. (2020). 18-cv-10055 (PKC) (United States District Court for the Southern District of New York)
Witt v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (2014). 772 F. 3d 1269 (United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit) Fabricated Cases Cited Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Martinez v. Delta Airlines Miller v. United Airlines Shaboon v. Egyptair Peterson v. Iran Air
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Richard J. Hunter, John H. Shannon
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
