The growing use of AI in legal research is introducing new risks, including fictitious case citations appearing in court filings, and reinforcing attorneys’ ethical duty to verify authorities before relying on them.
Joel MacMull, Chair of Mandelbaum Barrett PC’s Intellectual Property & Brand Management Practice Group, recently identified nonexistent citations in a co-defendant’s motion to dismiss in a trademark matter. Acting out of professional responsibility rather than strategy, he brought the issue forward. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ultimately sanctioned the party that relied on the fabricated authorities.
Courts nationwide are signaling that the burden of detecting inaccurate or unreliable citations rests with counsel, not the bench. Judges have increasingly criticized attorneys who fail to identify false authorities and, in some cases, have declined to award fees when lawyers did not alert the court.
Joel emphasizes that the rise of AI tools makes vigilance more important than ever. His guidance to practitioners is clear: there is no substitute for independently reviewing cited cases. Careful reading and verification remain fundamental to the competent practice of law.
🔗 To learn more about Joel MacMull and his practice, click here: https://mblawfirm.com/practice-areas/intellectual-property-brand-management-and-internet-law/