Insights & Events

Law360 published an article by Hollingsworth LLP partner Tamara Barago analyzing recent cases demonstrating the importance of checking an opponent’s court submissions for potential artificial intelligence-generated citation and quotation errors.

The article addresses the increasing number of reports of attorneys submitting documents containing false citations or quotations that are determined to be generated by an AI tool and courts’ willingness to award sanctions, including attorney’s fees, for these submissions.

The article examines multiple cases where courts awarded attorney’s fees to opposing counsel for identifying and documenting AI-generated errors in their opponents’ court submissions. The article also discusses cases where judges noted that attorneys had not alerted the court to the false or misrepresented sources in their opponents’ filings.

Given the escalating use of generative AI tools in the legal profession, the article recommends steps for counsel to consider when addressing an opponent’s court submissions. These include checking the cited sources (e.g., cases, statutes, published articles, expert reports) to determine that they exist, are cited properly, contain the quoted language, and support the stated proposition. If errors are identified, the article recommends documenting the errors and informing filing counsel – and potentially the court.

The article’s analysis of this issue is a reminder that, although AI tools can be helpful in various aspects of legal practice, they require clear guardrails and analytical review of outputs. This critical review of sources and cited authority includes not just an attorney’s own filings but also those of opposing counsel.