Attorneys May Have to Ask Expert Witnesses "Whether They Have Used AI in Drafting Their Declarations and What They Have Done to Verify Any AI-Generated Content"

From Kohls v. Ellison, which I quoted more extensively in an earlier post:

To be sure, Attorney General Ellison maintains that his office had no idea that Professor Hancock's declaration included fake citations, and counsel for the Attorney General sincerely apologized at oral argument for the unintentional fake citations in the Hancock Declaration. The Court takes Attorney General Ellison at his word and appreciates his candor in rectifying the issue.

But Attorney General Ellison's attorneys are reminded that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 imposes a "personal, nondelegable responsibility" to "validate the truth and legal reasonableness of the papers filed" in an action. The Court suggests that an "inquiry reasonable under the circumstances," Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b), may now require attorneys to ask their witnesses whether they have used AI in drafting their declarations and what they have done to verify any AI-generated content.

Thanks to Prof. Anthony Bushnell for pointing out the significance of this particular passage.

The post Attorneys May Have to Ask Expert Witnesses "Whether They Have Used AI in Drafting Their Declarations and What They Have Done to Verify Any AI-Generated Content" appeared first on Reason.com.