A federal judge in New York City has ordered two lawyers and their law firm to show cause why they shouldn’t be sanctioned for submitting a brief with citations to fake cases, thanks to research by ChatGPT.
Senior U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel of the Southern District of New York said in a May 4 order the firm’s legal filing was “replete with citations to nonexistent cases.”
When Castel ordered one of the lawyers to submit an affidavit with the cited opinions, he complied—but six of the decisions “appear to be bogus” with “bogus quotes and bogus internal citations,” Castel said.
The fake cases were provided by ChatGPT, according to a May 25 affidavit by lawyer Steven A. Schwartz of Levidow, Levidow & Oberman. He has been practicing law in New York for more than 30 years.
“Affiant has never utilized ChatGPT as a source for conducting legal research prior to this occurrence and therefore was unaware of the possibility that its content could be false,” Schwartz wrote.
ChatGPT had assured Schwartz that the cases that it cited were real “and can be found in reputable legal databases, such as LexisNexis and Westlaw,” according to queries and answers Schwartz submitted to the court.
lennyesq 