4 ms·
> and all it cost them was $5000? They also have to write written apologies to their client, and all of the judges who were mentioned in their fake cases, with
by jcranmer 3y ago
> and all it cost them was $5000?
They also have to write written apologies to their client, and all of the judges who were mentioned in their fake cases, with proof filed in the docket.
And they are the brunt of a very well-publicized lawsuit. The judge is effectively saying that all that publicity is punishment enough; he doesn't need to do anymore. He doesn't need to refer them to the bar for disbarment--the bar already knows about it. (The judge has no power to disbar them himself, he can only refer to the bar for disbarment.)
The biggest surprise is that they didn't get made to pay the defendant's legal fees as well, but that's because defendant didn't ask for any fees.
Oh, and the final punishment... they lost the case--they get no chance to redo their opposition to the motion to dismiss. Arguably, their client can also sue them for malpractice, and their malpractice carrier is likely to prefer to settle that rather than actually fight the case.
- AnimalMuppet 3y agoThe real punishment is this decision, laying out a record of Keystone-Cops-level buffoonery, dishonesty, and lying. Laying all that out in a published decision, in a case that's receiving a fair amount of interest, which means that the decision will be all over the internet. This isn't going to go away. This decision will dog them for the entire rest of their careers.
- jldugger 3y ago> This isn't going to go away. This decision will dog them for the entire rest of their careers. I get the impression from the events leading up to the use of GPT this is not the first time their competence led to outcomes that will "dog them for the entire rest of their careers."
- Zetice 3y ago> They also have to write written apologies to their client, and all of the judges who were mentioned in their fake cases, with proof filed in the docket. I thought the judge said he couldn't force them to do that because it wouldn't be sincere.
- dragonwriter 3y agoWhether or they choose to apologize, they do have to send letters that include a copy of the transcript of the hearing on sanctions and the sanctions order.
- pmoriarty 3y ago"They also have to write written apologies to their client, and all of the judges who were mentioned in their fake cases, with proof filed in the docket." They'll probably just have ChatGPT write their apologies for them.
- dwmcqueen 3y agoWhat is even better is this attorney - who relied on ChatGPT for research - when called to task to provide the legal opinions....couldn't even get the affidavit right. "The April 25 affidavit was filed in response to the Orders of April 11 and 12, 2023, but is sworn to before a Notary Public on the 25th of January 2023. Mr. LoDuca should be prepared to address this anomaly on June 8, 2023 and bring with him a wet-ink signed copy of the affidavit with the notary’s signature and stamp."
- asdfsadfk 3y ago> The judge is effectively saying that all that publicity is punishment enough; he doesn't need to do anymore. He doesn't need to refer them to the bar for disbarment--the bar already knows about it. (The judge has no power to disbar them himself, he can only refer to the bar for disbarment.) a reference from the judge and the bar just knowing about it are very different.
- flangola7 3y agoNo one is going to be disbarred over this, disbarment is a very high bar to clear. You have to extort your client or take some other brazenly malicious or illegal action.