律师在法庭上引用由 ChatGPT 编造的假案例后遭遇了非常糟糕的一天

发布于 2023-06-24

Summary: A federal judge fined a plaintiff's lawyers $5,000 and dismissed their lawsuit after they used ChatGPT to research court filings that cited six fake cases. Lawyers Steven Schwartz and Peter LoDuca of Levidow, Levidow, & Oberman submitted non-existent judicial opinions with fake quotes and citations. The judge found them guilty of bad faith and conscious avoidance. The case was originally from a New York state court and moved to US District Court. Mata sought damages for an injury during an Avianca flight. Schwartz used ChatGPT for research without verification. LoDuca didn't check the accuracy of Schwartz's work. The judge found flaws in the fake cases and ordered the lawyers to send letters to real judges. The firm will take remedial measures to prevent similar incidents.
Key Points:
- Judge fined lawyers for using ChatGPT to cite fake cases.
- Lawyers submitted non-existent judicial opinions.
- Case moved from state to federal court.
- Mata sought damages for flight injury.
- Schwartz used ChatGPT without verification.
- Judge found flaws in fake cases.
- Lawyers ordered to send letters to real judges.
- Firm to take remedial measures.
Important Details:
- US District Judge Kevin Castel wrote the order.
- The judge issued one fine to be paid by the two lawyers and their firm.
  Roberto Mata vs. Avianca was the real case.
- Schwartz was representing Mata in state court but not in federal court.
- Schwartz testified he thought ChatGPT couldn't fabricate cases.
- The Levidow firm didn't have Westlaw or LexisNexis accounts.
- The fake [Varghese v. China Southern Airlines] excerpt had flaws.
- Schwartz violated a federal rule in his affidavit.
- Thomas Corvino acknowledged responsibility and took remedial measures.

阅读 12