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.

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.

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

It almost makes one wonder if this was really an attorney. After all, what real attorney would EVER pull a "d*ck move?" And especially in litigation. The Marquis of Queensbury rules, strict ethical standards, and of course, it is all just a search for the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. After all, we're just here to find that truth, ensure perfect justice, and by golly, win or lose, make sure each and every client has a warm and fuzzy feeling about the whole thing!

4:40, looks like AI will kill more white collar jobs than they were expecting. I agree that lawyers need to charge less if they are dependent on AI that much. If you can find a good lawyer these days you are doing good.

The end of the reliance on ai by lawyers comes from their insurance carriers - declining to cover malpractice due to AI reliance and then these mistakes disappear.

@4:40 - Lambert is that you??

Sometimes no one wants the truth to come out. When it does, they just say they wasn’t aware of that information. Zero accountability or integrity in our government, legal and judicial systems. What do we exempt from these people?

That's not hallucination, the case cited 65 So. 651 actually has basically that language in it, although I guess his error was " " it when its not an exact " ". But such is not hallucination.

The use of AI is becoming common practice. The Courts are aware and are now actively on the look out. Counsel-opposite is aware and on the look out. AI is a good place to start legal research. It is a DANGEROUS place to finish legal research.

It appears that none of you know the difference in appellant and apppellee. This says counsel for the appellant made the mistake. That appears to be an attorney named Terris Harris. I do not think he works at the firm mentioned.

Attorneys should resist efforts by the Mississippi bar for sanctions for using AI until law clerks who use AI under the supervision of judges are penalized.

9:08, Terris Harris was trial counsel for the plaintiff. The offending motion for the appellant was signed by Damonta D. Morgan, Forman Watkins & Krutz LLP.

AI will not replace lawyers. It will help weed out the good from the bad. What makes a good lawyer good is their willingness to put the work in to be good. A good lawyer becomes better using AI just like a talented surgeon becomes better with the latest developments in medical technology. A bad lawyer becomes worse with AI because they use it to become even lazier, just like what happens when you put the latest surgical robot in the hands of a bad surgeon. As to pointing out bad cites to counsel opposite, I know of no litigator who does that unless opposing counsel is a personal friend.