Lawyers keep getting into trouble for using AI to write their filings, but Julien Xavier Neals appears to be the first judge to find themselves on the same hook. An opinion issued by the New Jersey U.S. District Court judge contained bizarre errors, including citations of nonexistent sources: a classic tell for large language models, i.e. AI chatbots.
Willkie Farr & Gallagher partner Andrew Lichtman, who represents CorMedix, wrote Neals on Tuesday, telling the judge he may want to "consider whether amendment or any other action should be taken" in regard to errors he made in his June 30 decision. Lawyers in a separate case earlier this month also pointed out flaws in Neals' CorMedix opinion, saying it "contains pervasive and material inaccuracies."
The case shows a rare example of a judge being called out for the sort of elementary mistakes in legal drafting that courts have more frequently pointed out in the work of lawyers.
The lawyers did not suggest Neals used AI, but the stylistic cues and hallucinated cases make the assumption inevitable.
Neals' opinion referenced a case captioned Stichting Pensioenfonds Metaal en Techniek v. Verizon Commc'ns Inc. in the Southern District of New York, though Lichtman said no such case exists in that venue. "We believe the court was referring to a case with the same caption from the District of New Jersey," the lawyer wrote.
The case is a business tangle [PDF] filed by shareholders against CorMedix, the sort of company that attains a billion-dollar market cap without ever appearing in the news or having a Wikipedia article. Perfect vehicle for the life savings of future plaintiffs.
