Legal Technology & AI
Examining how lawyers, courts, and litigants can use technology and artificial intelligence responsibly to strengthen legal analysis, improve litigation workflows, and make informed decisions without surrendering professional judgment, accuracy, confidentiality, or accountability.
AI in Litigation
The analysis in this section considers how artificial intelligence is being used in legal research, motion practice, discovery, document review, case evaluation, trial preparation, and other litigation tasks. The focus remains on practical uses that improve efficiency while preserving the lawyer’s responsibility to evaluate the facts, verify the law, protect client information, and exercise independent judgment.
Hallucinations and Unverified Authority
Courts are increasingly confronting briefs, affirmations, and other submissions containing fabricated cases, inaccurate quotations, nonexistent citations, or propositions that the cited authority does not support. The decisions discussed here examine how courts respond, what verification they expect, and the consequences that may follow when AI-generated material reaches the court without meaningful attorney review.
Recent Legal Technology & AI Decisions & Analysis
-
Evidence DECISion
AI Hallucinations in New York Courts: Sanctions Trend
Read more: AI Hallucinations in New York Courts: Sanctions TrendNew York courts are sanctioning AI hallucinations, warning lawyers, and scrutinizing discovery of AI prompts and outputs.
-
Evidence DECISion
New York Appellate Division Sanctions AI-Generated Fake Citations
Read more: New York Appellate Division Sanctions AI-Generated Fake CitationsThe New York Appellate Division sanctioned counsel for submitting AI-generated fake case citations, establishing the first New York appellate authority addressing AI hallucinations in legal filings.
How the Cases and Developments Are Analyzed
The writings in this hub go beyond identifying that a court mentioned artificial intelligence. They examine the procedural setting, the technology involved, the lawyer’s conduct, the court’s expectations, and the practical effect of the ruling. The analysis considers how the development should influence legal research, motion practice, discovery, trial preparation, client communication, and litigation management.
AI-Generated Legal Work
Decisions involving fabricated authorities, unsupported quotations, inaccurate summaries, and other unreliable AI-generated material are examined for the verification duties imposed on counsel and the consequences of submitting deficient work to a court.
Court Rules and Expectations
Court notices, standing orders, judicial directives, and ethics developments are evaluated to identify disclosure requirements, certification obligations, confidentiality concerns, and emerging standards for the responsible use of generative AI.
Litigation and Workflow Impact
Articles consider how technology can assist with case assessment, document review, discovery, research, drafting, damages analysis, trial preparation, and other recurring tasks while keeping attorneys and claims professionals in control of the final work.
Technology Should Strengthen Judgment, Not Replace It
Artificial intelligence can organize information, identify issues, accelerate research, and improve litigation workflows. Its value, however, depends on careful supervision. Reliable legal work still requires lawyers to confirm the governing authority, test factual assumptions, protect privileged and confidential information, understand the limitations of the technology, and take responsibility for every submission and recommendation.