In a case highlighting the increasing use of AI in legal practices, attorney Thomas Guyer faced scrutiny after submitting a brief containing inaccurate citations and quotes generated by artificial intelligence. However, U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen opted against sanctions, acknowledging Guyer's acceptance of responsibility and the growing prevalence of AI tools in the legal field.
Judge Cullen emphasized that while AI is becoming commonplace, lawyers must uphold their professional duty to ensure the accuracy of their filings. He described the incident as showcasing a potential pitfall of AI technology. Guyer, a seasoned lawyer with a long-standing career, admitted the error, attributing it to the AI program he used.
Judge Thomas Cullen on Capitol Hill in Sept. 2020. (Senate)
Guyer’s lawyer, Denis Quinn, expressed his client's deep remorse, assuring the court that such a mistake wouldn't be repeated. Judge Cullen, citing Guyer's previously unblemished record and his proactive identification of errors overlooked by both the court and opposing counsel, decided against penalties.
AI and human interaction concept (iStock)
The case stemmed from a lawsuit filed by Guyer's client, Karen Iovino, alleging retaliatory firing for reporting concerns about her employer's contract with the State Department. In subsequent filings, Guyer clarified that while the cases cited did exist, the AI tool he employed, Atrophic Inc.’s Claude 3 Opus, had misquoted and miscited them. He defended the use of AI in legal research and writing, highlighting the potential of such tools to generate strong legal arguments.
Empty courtroom (iStock)
Following the incident, the Virginia and Oregon state bars initiated investigations. Judge Cullen expressed his hope that his opinion would guide these investigations, although no updates have been released by either bar association yet.
