Jackson Jambalaya

I've stopped caring. Let AI run the whole system for all I care. Equally absurd outcomes guaranteed.

It says they used Westlaw's AI. I know Westlaw has been pushing it. That is a little different than just using AI.

Too much LSD causes chronic hallucinations.

why go to law school? why pass the bar? Just use AI.

Ah, the mighty Forman Watkins & Krutz falls flat on its face! I agree that the Courts are going to have to start heavily sanctioning attorneys for this type of conduct.

No matter how much attorneys (and everyone else) tell themselves that AI is just a tool like spell-check, it isn't. When an attorney uses AI to flesh out ideas and pleadings, the attorney loses the most important part of the writing and legal representation process: thinking.

https://www.formanwatkins.com/blog/formanwatkins-secures-historic-victory-in-mississippi-case-involving-hallucinated-case-citations/

I guess not everyone at the firm got the message about "honesty, accuracy, and diligence in legal advocacy."

Because the lawyers and judges make sure you need their approval via a license to practice law. Same with medical professionals. And this is important because you are supposed to use AI as a helpful tool but still use your wisdom and judgment to filter out the mistakes. Humans are just lazy creatures. What really needs to happen is that the hourly rate for an attorney should be below $30 an hour while a plumber or electrician should go up to $250 per hour. While AI can write legal documents. AI can’t competently plumb your house or rewire your fuse box.

And this is likely to happen because tokenization of AI tools means the firm will be paying for access to that AI model and dataset which is more valuable than the attorney using it.

This is the same case in which attorney Barnes failed to provide the required pre-suit notice to defendants.

https://courts.ms.gov/images/Opinions/CO190141.pdf

A responsible member of the Bar would call the lawyer who miss-cited the law and point it out, so it could be corrected without embarrassment to the other side. I've done that when a lawyer cited a case that had been overruled. Cutthroat lawyering is what gives lawyers a bad reputation.

If it is Westlaw producing the result, which is one of the two major research tools used by not only lawyers but the Court for legal research, there should be some expectation of reliability. There has to be more to this.

It was kind of d*ck move to point it out directly to the court in the response.

They could have called the other attorneys and given them a chance to fall on their own sword.

"It says they used Westlaw's AI. I know Westlaw has been pushing it. That is a little different than just using AI."

I respectfully disagree. I understand what you're saying and would hope Westlaw's AI would be better and more accurate than generic ole AI, but an attorney still has an ethical obligation and duty to verify the accuracy of all cites and quotes.

This attorney is quite young and only been practicing for 3 years or a little less. But interestingly I see he has clerked or been staff counsel for two federal judges, one US District Court Judge and one 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge. Respectfully he should know better than to rely on AI for citations and quotes without verifying their accuracy...as should all attorneys by now.

For all the hoopla, I’m afraid AI is going to be creating a multitude of ways to cause problems.

How does Forman Watkins and Krutz figure in to this?

4:57, I think the point was to embarrass the other side and declare their own superiority.

That, and suck up to the municipal claims adjuster.