3 ms·
1. He used a tool that displayed a warning label saying that it's not trustworthy. 2. He didn't check the results against official, established database. 3. H
by lupire 3y ago
1. He used a tool that displayed a warning label saying that it's not trustworthy.
2. He didn't check the results against official, established database.
3. He got caught, lied about it, and then did it all again.
4. The legal bar for good reason, has a bigger ethical standard than the average business. These are officers of the Court.
This is equivalent to a doctor prescribing a patient to take medication from a 3P seller FURODNZ on Amazon.com
- Isamu 3y agoHe had three others doing the research preparing the brief, that means especially the citations that were fake. He did not realize they didn’t do the due diligence to check that the citations were correct, let alone that they were not completely invented. But he was the person on the hook with the judge. This amounts to filing false statements and that is well known issue that we don’t have to invent new penalties for.
- lupire 3y agoDisbarment isn't a new penalty. As the licensed member of the bar, his one job is to be responsible for the output of his team. If he's not doing that, then he doesn't need to be a lawyer. His staff can file their BS directly to the court.
- threatofrain 3y agoSimilarly the CPA shouldn't be able to pass off blame to their team.