What began as a routine appeal has become a cautionary tale about the misuse of artificial intelligence (AI) and its consequences for attorneys, their clients, and the courts….
asserted
began → begin → attorneys
While reviewing appellee's [i.e., the Bank's] brief, the court discovered that it contained multiple citations to cases that the court was unable to locate or confirm as legitimate.
asserted
court → review → that
On June 22, we issued an order requiring appellee to show cause "why the court should not strike its brief for citing nonexistent cases that are possibly the product of artificial intelligence (AI) hallucinations."
uncertain
that → issue → hallucinations
The next day, one of appellee's attorneys at the firm, Loishirl W. Hall, filed a response in her own capacity.
asserted
one → file → capacity
Ms. Hall confirmed that four of the brief's cited authorities did not exist.
asserted
four → confirm → authorities
She acknowledged that these citations were "not legitimate legal authority" and "should not have appeared in a brief filed with this Court."
asserted
citations → acknowledge → Court
{Ms. Hall has informed the court that she no longer works at the firm and thus no longer represents appellee, although appellee has not moved for her withdrawal from the case.}
asserted
appellee → inform → case
Ms. Hall explained that she had "used Google's generative artificial intelligence search tool to assist in locating case authority" and did not verify the existence or accuracy of those citations before filing the brief.
asserted
she → explain → brief
She recognized that she had a duty to verify the accuracy of every authority submitted to this court and apologized for her failure to do so.
asserted
she → recognize → failure
As part of this mea culpa, Ms. Hall assured the court that she had taken the remedial measure of verifying that the remaining citations in the brief were legitimate authority and pledged that, going forward (presumably in her representation of other clients), she would not rely on any AI tool "for legal research without confirming each authority" or file anything that includes citations she has not independently verified.
uncertain
she → assure → citations
Ms. Hall represented that she "deeply regrets this error and the burden it has placed on the [c]ourt and all parties."
asserted
it → represent → c]ourt
The firm subsequently filed a response for appellee.
asserted
firm → file → appellee
The firm stated that it was "unaware" of Ms. Hall's actions when the brief was filed.
asserted
brief → state → actions
Although two other attorneys—Jianna Jaques Santos and Michael T. Cantrell—were listed on the brief with Ms. Hall, no information was provided about their review of appellee's brief before filing.
asserted
information → list → filing
Instead, the firm represented that it "only became fully aware of the situation" (emphasis added) once the court issued its show-cause order and Ms. Hall responded.
asserted
Hall → represent → order
The implication—that the firm did nothing after the court issued its order to become "fully aware" on its own that it had included fake case citations in its brief—is surprising, to say the least.
asserted
it → issue → least
The firm then shifted much of the blame to Ms. Hall, who had stated in her filing that she had never filed an appellate brief before this one.
asserted
she → shift → one
The firm represented that it prohibits employees from using AI in the "drafting of any legal correspondence or documents" and that failing to verify citations "obtained in any manner, which includes the use of artificial intelligence, is a violation of firm policy" of which all employees are made aware during initial and annual employment trainings.
asserted
employees → represent → trainings
The firm did not attach the policy for this court's review.
asserted
firm → attach → review
Highlighting that "these actions were taken by a former employee" of the firm, and without detailing what actions the firm had taken to supervise or review Ms. Hall's work, the firm acknowledged only that "further review should have been undertaken."
asserted
review → highlight → work
The firm then assured the court that it was "genuinely remorseful for this failure" and that it intends to take appropriate measures to ensure that this "type of situation" never occurs again.
asserted
type → assure → situation
In replying to Ms. Hall's response, Mr. Douglas asked the court to, among other things, deny Deutsche Bank an opportunity to file a corrected brief.
asserted
Douglas → reply → brief
He registered incredulity at the fact that "a competent law firm representing one of the largest financial institution[s] in the world could make" such a mistake.
uncertain
firm → register → mistake
Mr. Douglas did not file a separate reply to appellee's response to the show-cause order.
asserted
Douglas → file → order
As we discuss below, we echo Mr. Douglas's incredulity….
asserted
we → discuss → incredulity
You can read the full opinion for more details, but here's the bottom line as to sanctions:
asserted
line → read → sanctions
To be sure, some of the cases cited in Deutsche Bank's response brief are genuine and some of the propositions of law are sound.
asserted
some → cite → law
But we "reject any notion that because some authority exists to support a legal proposition it should negate the harm caused by hallucinated cases.
asserted
it → reject → cases
Put bluntly—absolutely not; period; end of story; all stop."
asserted
all → put → story
We caution that citing to even a single fake case can be sanctionable because "no brief, pleading, motion, or any other paper filed in any court should contain any citations—whether provided by generative AI or any other source—that" an attorney has not personally "read and verified."
asserted
attorney → caution → that
Competent legal representation requires the investment of significant time and effort; if an attorney deems their client's claims as "not worth the effort, [they] should either tell [their] clients that they fall short or advise them to hire another lawyer—not file obviously insufficient pleadings and briefs generated by AI tools."
uncertain
they → require → tools
It is axiomatic that our rules exist to ensure the orderly, prompt, and just disposition of appeals.
asserted
rules → exist → appeals
These rules exist not for the convenience of the court but for the benefit of litigants and counsel who have a right to rely on them and must comply with them.
asserted
who → exist → them
We cannot condone disregard of court rules, whether willful or negligent.
asserted
We → condone → rules
As such, we deem it appropriate to strike appellee's brief.
asserted
it → deem → brief
{The firm suggested that the court could accept the appellee's brief as filed but with the erroneous citations redacted.
uncertain
court → suggest → brief
We reject this suggestion, as it would constitute effectively no sanction at all.}
asserted
it → reject → sanction
We also refer this matter to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel for any investigation it deems appropriate.
asserted
it → refer → investigation
Judge Glickman concurred to discuss the scope of D.C. courts' sanctioning authority, but also added this (as well as another matter that I note in a separate post):
Bad as AI-fabricated citations are, we should recognize that they are only the tip of a perilous iceberg.
asserted
they → concur → iceberg
That iceberg is the use of artificial intelligence not only to research the law but also to draft a brief.
asserted
iceberg → research → brief
…and 19 more, not listed.
The Aporia
