3 ms·
No it’s not. You’ll get old one day. It’s pretty challenging to keep track of what’s real and what isn’t possible with technology. The guy apologized and said
by CPLX 3y ago
No it’s not.
You’ll get old one day. It’s pretty challenging to keep track of what’s real and what isn’t possible with technology.
The guy apologized and said he thought it was a search engine.
He should definitely face some sanctions but someone had to learn this lesson in public the hard way for word to spread.
- code_runner 3y agoThese exemptions we are passing out are insane. This guy claims he thought it was a search engine? Lawyers use specific case law databases and they SHOULD approach any new tools with healthy skepticism. And if he googled it and cited a fake case would it be better? Why wouldn’t you vet the information.
- CPLX 3y agoYeah it was bad. Disbarment is equivalent to taking away his entire life's work. Two minute hate on the internet every day is fun and all but it's not that severe.
- Ekaros 3y agoHe failed his duty to both client and the court. This was wilful negligence. This is like surgeon doing wrong procedure he just invented on patient.
- vkou 3y ago> Disbarment is equivalent to taking away his entire life's work. 'Lawyer' is the kind of profession which actually holds its practitioners to a standard, because the system falls apart when they stop behaving honestly. This wasn't an oopsie-daisies, this was dishonesty, followed by further dishonesty, when they supplied bogus references for these cases.
- CPLX 3y agoBut it wasn't dishonesty it was total obliviousness, maybe negligence.
- mtrpcic 3y agoA negligent civil engineer that failed to verify construction details provided by GPT, which later led to a bridge collapse, would lose their license. A negligent doctor that failed to vet a treatment protocol to a patient that later caused them harm would lose their license. Negligence is a fair, reasonable, and valid reason for someone to be determined unqualified to practice their profession in the future.
- CPLX 3y ago> A negligent doctor that failed to vet a treatment protocol to a patient that later caused them harm would lose their license No, they wouldn’t
- vkou 3y agoIt crossed the line from stupidity into dishonesty when the judge asked him "Wtf is this court case that you're citing", and the lawyer sent the judge a fabricated document. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.29.1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.57... How can anyone trust anything a lawyer does, when they are willing to fabricate documents, in order to continue to lie to a judge? This is Better Call Saul-level chicanery. He could have fessed up and apologized when called out on it, but he doubled down.
- geon 3y agoWe expect doctors to not pump us full with chlorine, even if chatgpt says it's good for us. Why are lawyers exempt from responsibility?
- cj 3y agoIs this case different from the same incident a couple weeks ago? (also on the front page here)
- FpUser 3y ago>"The guy apologized and said he thought it was a search engine." I am also having a thought: stop bullshitting. Or stop being a lawyer as a result of gross incompetence (I wish the same applies to politicians).
- spuz 3y agoThe lawyers not only cited bogus cases, but when asked to provide copies of those bogus cases, fabricated multiple page PDF documents from whole cloth. This is impossible to argue as a mistake. Here is an example of one of the fabricated cases. The 11th circuit has no record of this case. 1 of the 3 judges named in the case was not on the 11th circuit at the time: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.29.1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.57...