AI Errors Prompt Judges to Retract Rulings, Raising Concerns About Accuracy in Legal Filings

Two U.S. judges recently retracted their rulings after lawyers brought to their attention filings containing significant inaccuracies. These errors included fabricated case details and misattributed quotes, highlighting potential issues with the increasing use of artificial intelligence in legal research and submissions.

In New Jersey, Judge Julien Neals withdrew his denial of a motion to dismiss a securities fraud case. The decision was based on filings with "pervasive and material inaccuracies," including numerous instances of fabricated quotes and mistaken lawsuit outcomes.

Similarly, in Mississippi, Judge Henry Wingate replaced his original temporary restraining order concerning a state law on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. Lawyers informed the judge that the initial decision relied on the purported testimony of individuals whose declarations were not present in the case record.

The errors in both cases, quickly identified by attorneys, prompted the judges to revise or retract their orders. These incidents coincide with the rapid growth of generative AI across various professions, particularly among younger workers. The inaccuracies in these legal filings resemble AI-related errors, such as the use of "hallucinated" quotes and incorrect case citations.

For attorneys, the accuracy of court filings is paramount. The American Bar Association emphasizes that lawyers are responsible for the veracity of all information in their submissions, including AI-generated content. Recent cases have seen sanctions imposed on law firms and attorneys for submitting erroneous filings generated by AI, including fabricated quotes and incorrect legal citations.