Legal professionals
影響を受けたインシデント
インシデント 7042 Report
Study Highlights Persistent Hallucinations in Legal AI Systems
2024-05-23
Stanford University’s Human-Centered AI Institute (HAI) conducted a study in which they designed a "pre-registered dataset of over 200 open-ended legal queries" to test AI products by LexisNexis (creator of Lexis+ AI) and Thomson Reuters (creator of Westlaw AI-Assisted Research and Ask Practical Law AI). The researchers found that these legal models hallucinate in 1 out of 6 (or more) benchmarking queries.
もっとIncidents involved as Deployer
インシデント 16583 Report
State Farm Defense Counsel Acknowledged AI-Assisted Filings in Meni-Siliga v. A's Contractor, Inc. Contained Fabricated Legal Authorities
2026-03-31
In Fa'alagilagi Meni-Siliga v. A's Contractor, Inc., et al., attorneys representing State Farm acknowledged that AI-assisted motions contained fabricated and otherwise inaccurate legal authorities. Attorney Jacquelene Robinson said she used the legal AI tool Irys and failed to verify some citations. Opposing counsel identified the errors, after which the firm apologized and filed corrected versions.
もっとインシデント 7042 Report
Study Highlights Persistent Hallucinations in Legal AI Systems
2024-05-23
Stanford University’s Human-Centered AI Institute (HAI) conducted a study in which they designed a "pre-registered dataset of over 200 open-ended legal queries" to test AI products by LexisNexis (creator of Lexis+ AI) and Thomson Reuters (creator of Westlaw AI-Assisted Research and Ask Practical Law AI). The researchers found that these legal models hallucinate in 1 out of 6 (or more) benchmarking queries.
もっとインシデント 15711 Report
California Immigration Attorneys Reportedly Sanctioned Over Briefs Containing Probable Hallucinations in LNU v. Blanche
2025-10-20
California immigration attorneys Mike Singh Sethi and William Rounds were reportedly sanctioned in LNU v. Blanche after Ninth Circuit filings included purportedly fabricated and materially inaccurate legal authorities. The court said unauthorized generative AI use by unlicensed brief writers was probable and found that the attorneys failed to verify the filings and repeatedly lacked candor about the errors' source.
もっとインシデント 15721 Report
Westlaw CoCounsel Reportedly Generated False Legal Quotations in United States v. Farris
2025-10-21
In United States v. Farris, court-appointed attorney Steven N. Howe admitted using Westlaw CoCounsel to draft appellate briefs that reportedly included AI-generated false quotations and misleading descriptions of precedent. The filing disrupted Farris's appeal, leading the court to appoint new counsel and restart briefing, while Howe lost his compensation and faced possible disciplinary action.
もっと