Latest news with #legalresearch
Forbes
4 days ago
- Forbes
Attorneys—Track AI Hallucination Case Citations With This New Tool
This database tracks hallucinated case citations for attorneys. The legal profession has a new essential resource that could save your reputation, your career and your clients' cases. It's not filled with actual case law, but rather with cautionary tales that every attorney needs to understand. The AI Hallucination Cases database, maintained by legal researcher Damien Charlotin, systematically tracks every documented instance where attorneys have submitted artificial intelligence-generated fake legal citations to courts worldwide. With over two-hundred cases documented and counting, this represents a valuable resource for attorneys on how AI tools create fictional case citations that look completely legitimate. Each entry provides detailed information about the specific court, the nature of the AI hallucinations, the sanctions imposed and the monetary penalties assessed. It's practical intelligence that can help you avoid making the same mistakes that have already caused reputation damage to other attorneys, and in some cases, their careers. Tracking AI Hallucination Cases: Why Attorneys Should Bookmark This Database Understanding why this database exists requires grasping the fundamental challenge that AI tools present to legal practice. When attorneys use AI like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Grok for research, these tools sometimes generate citations that look entirely legitimate but correspond to cases that never existed. The database illustrates that this is more than just a rare glitch. It's a systematic problem affecting attorneys across all practice areas and experience levels. The database serves two primary functions that make it essential for legal professionals: The database is designed to be searchable and filterable, allowing you to find information most relevant to your practice. You can search by jurisdiction to see how courts in your area have handled AI hallucination cases, filter by practice area to understand risks specific to your field, or examine cases involving particular AI tools you might be considering using. AI Hallucination Cases: Patterns Every Attorney Should Understand The database reveals several consistent patterns that every legal professional should understand. One of the most striking findings is how sophisticated AI hallucinations can be. These aren't obviously fake citations with nonsensical party names or impossible dates. Instead, they often involve plausible case names, proper citation formats and legal reasoning that sounds entirely legitimate. AI tools frequently generate citations that include all the elements attorneys expect to see: believable party names, appropriate court jurisdictions, realistic dates and even fabricated quotations that align with the legal arguments being made. AI Hallucination Cases: Geographic and Practice Area Scope AI hallucinations in legal practice are not confined to any particular jurisdiction or area of law. Cases have emerged across the United States in federal and state courts, and international entries include incidents from the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Israel, Brazil and several other countries. The practice area coverage is equally comprehensive. The database includes cases from family law, criminal defense, civil rights litigation, personal injury, immigration law, corporate law and virtually every other area of legal practice. This broad scope means that no attorney can assume they're immune from AI hallucination risks simply because they practice in a particular field. Your Next Steps: How to Access The Tracker The AI Hallucination Cases database is freely accessible online and regularly updated as new cases emerge. Legal professionals should bookmark this resource and check it regularly to stay informed about new developments and trends. The database's search and filtering capabilities make it easy to find information relevant to your specific practice area and jurisdiction. When evaluating AI tools for your practice, use the database to understand the track record of different platforms and the types of verification procedures that have proven most effective. If you're developing AI use policies for your firm, the database provides concrete examples of what can go wrong. Most importantly, treat the database as an ongoing educational resource rather than a one-time consultation. The legal profession's relationship with AI technology is evolving rapidly, and the database provides real-time documentation of that evolution. Every legal professional who wants to use AI tools safely and effectively should make this resource a regular part of their professional development routine.
Yahoo
01-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Clio to acquire legal intelligence provider vLex in $1bn deal
Canadian legal software company Clio has agreed to acquire vLex, a Spain-based legal intelligence provider, for $1bn, payable in cash and stock. Established in 2000, vLex, part of Oakley Capital's portfolio, offers a global legal research platform powered by AI. It serves clients in more than 110 countries with tools like Vincent, used by numerous legal teams, including Am Law 100 firms, courts, and law societies. Vincent operates on vLex's database of more than one billion legal documents, supporting cross-jurisdictional research, audio and video analysis, legal theory testing, and tailored workflows. Clio CEO and founder Jack Newton said: 'For 17 years, we've built the foundational platform that enables law firms to operate at their highest potential. With vLex, we're building on that foundation with technology that understands the substance of the law. 'By bringing together the business and practice of law in a unified platform, we're revolutionising every aspect of legal work.' The acquisition, Clio's largest to date, integrates vLex's research platform with Clio's system, used by over 200,000 legal professionals, to combine legal management and research functions. The transaction, which is expected to close later in 2025, is subject to standard conditions and regulatory approvals. vLexCEO and co-founder Lluis Faus said: 'Together with Clio, we have a bold vision for the future that empowers legal professionals to go beyond traditional research and operational silos, harnessing deeper intelligence and broader impact.' Goldman Sachs served as Clio's exclusive financial advisor, with legal counsel provided by Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, and Gowling. "Clio to acquire legal intelligence provider vLex in $1bn deal " was originally created and published by Verdict, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Zawya
20-06-2025
- Business
- Zawya
The winners of the Habib Al Mulla Academy Legal Research Writing Competition were announced
Dubai, UAE – Habib Al Mulla Academy, in collaboration with LexisNexis and Saint Joseph University in Dubai, proudly held the awards ceremony of the first edition of the Habib Al Mulla Legal Writing Competition, a unique initiative aimed at empowering future legal minds and encouraging innovation in legislative writing. This morning's ceremony at the Waldorf Astoria DIFC was attended by legal professionals, academics, and competition finalists. The event concluded with an award presentation by Dr Juma Alfalasi from the Dubai Legal Affairs Department (DLAD), followed by closing remarks from Dr. Habib Al Mulla. We are pleased to announce the top three winners: Alia Al Marzouqi – First Place Abeer Shalish – Second Place Aseel Abu Shehab – Third Place The competition invited students from across the UAE to submit legal research papers focused on current legislative developments and innovative legal solutions. Participants were evaluated by a distinguished panel of legal academics and practitioners. It was also announced that the first-place prize has been increased to AED 20,000 in the second edition and that a new category has been introduced for legal research in the GCC countries.
Yahoo
07-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Lawyers could face ‘severe' penalties for fake AI-generated citations, UK court warns
The High Court of England and Wales says lawyers need to take stronger steps to prevent the misuse of artificial intelligence in their work. In a ruling tying together two recent cases, Judge Victoria Sharp wrote that generative AI tools like ChatGPT 'are not capable of conducting reliable legal research." 'Such tools can produce apparently coherent and plausible responses to prompts, but those coherent and plausible responses may turn out to be entirely incorrect,' Judge Sharp wrote. 'The responses may make confident assertions that are simply untrue.' That doesn't mean lawyers cannot use AI in their research, but she said they have a professional duty 'to check the accuracy of such research by reference to authoritative sources, before using it in the course of their professional work.' Judge Sharp suggested that the growing number of cases where lawyers (including, on the U.S. side, lawyers representing major AI platforms) have cited what appear to be AI-generated falsehoods suggests that 'more needs to be done to ensure that the guidance is followed and lawyers comply with their duties to the court,' and she said her ruling will be forwarded to professional bodies including the Bar Council and the Law Society. In one of the cases in question, a lawyer representing a man seeking damages against two banks submitted a filing with 45 citations — 18 of those cases did not exist, while many others 'did not contain the quotations that were attributed to them, did not support the propositions for which they were cited, and did not have any relevance to the subject matter of the application,' Judge Sharp said. In the other, a lawyer representing a man who had been evicted from his London home wrote a court filing citing five cases that did not appear to exist. (The lawyer denied using AI, though she said the citations may have come from AI-generated summaries that appeared in 'Google or Safari.') Judge Sharp said that while the court decided not to initiate contempt proceedings, that is 'not a precedent.' 'Lawyers who do not comply with their professional obligations in this respect risk severe sanction,' she added. Both lawyers were either referred or referred themselves to professional regulators. Judge Sharp noted that when lawyers do not meet their duties to the court, the court's powers range from 'public admonition' to the imposition of costs, contempt proceedings, or even 'referral to the police.' This article originally appeared on TechCrunch at Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
07-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Lawyers could face ‘severe' penalties for fake AI-generated citations, UK court warns
The High Court of England and Wales says lawyers need to take stronger steps to prevent the misuse of artificial intelligence in their work. In a ruling tying together two recent cases, Judge Victoria Sharp wrote that generative AI tools like ChatGPT 'are not capable of conducting reliable legal research." 'Such tools can produce apparently coherent and plausible responses to prompts, but those coherent and plausible responses may turn out to be entirely incorrect,' Judge Sharp wrote. 'The responses may make confident assertions that are simply untrue.' That doesn't mean lawyers cannot use AI in their research, but she said they have a professional duty 'to check the accuracy of such research by reference to authoritative sources, before using it in the course of their professional work.' Judge Sharp suggested that the growing number of cases where lawyers (including, on the U.S. side, lawyers representing major AI platforms) have cited what appear to be AI-generated falsehoods suggests that 'more needs to be done to ensure that the guidance is followed and lawyers comply with their duties to the court,' and she said her ruling will be forwarded to professional bodies including the Bar Council and the Law Society. In one of the cases in question, a lawyer representing a man seeking damages against two banks submitted a filing with 45 citations — 18 of those cases did not exist, while many others 'did not contain the quotations that were attributed to them, did not support the propositions for which they were cited, and did not have any relevance to the subject matter of the application,' Judge Sharp said. In the other, a lawyer representing a man who had been evicted from his London home wrote a court filing citing five cases that did not appear to exist. (The lawyer denied using AI, though she said the citations may have come from AI-generated summaries that appeared in 'Google or Safari.') Judge Sharp said that while the court decided not to initiate contempt proceedings, that is 'not a precedent.' 'Lawyers who do not comply with their professional obligations in this respect risk severe sanction,' she added. Both lawyers were either referred or referred themselves to professional regulators. Judge Sharp noted that when lawyers do not meet their duties to the court, the court's powers range from 'public admonition' to the imposition of costs, contempt proceedings, or even 'referral to the police.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data
