3 ms·
> In a reply brief, Karlen apologized for citing fictitious cases and said that they came from an online consultant he hired to write the brief who claimed to b
by sophacles 3y ago
> In a reply brief, Karlen apologized for citing fictitious cases and said that they came from an online consultant he hired to write the brief who claimed to be an attorney licensed in California.
If the person hired was an attorney - can they be sued by Karlen for his original payment as well as the fines imposed by the court?
If Karlen was scammed, I would hope the Feds take interest in this, as this sort of scam is potentailly very dangerous.
I'm sure there are plenty of other scenarios that could turn out to be the truth (aside from the lawyer used GPT and the "lawyer" used GPT), but assuming Karlen is telling the truth I find these questions to be interesting.
- zdragnar 3y agoIF the person is an attorney, he should definitely be filing a complaint with the California Bar, and seeking a refund (possibly going to court if one isn't provided). However, as a professional, the buck stops with Karlen for what he files. Whether or not GPT was involved is irrelevant, insofar as he relied on what any due diligence would have revealed to be a faulty source.
- SuperNinKenDo 3y agoI don't belueve Karlen was an attorney, he was representing himself, and while that doesnt per se mean he isn't an attorney, I doubt most attorney's would do that.