We’ve
all
heard
the
hype
about
artificial
intelligence’s
capabilities
to
do
the
heavy
lifting
in
the
legal
world,
but
a
recent
faceplant
by
a
Biglaw
firm
shows
how
far
we
still
have
to
go.
In
yet
another
case
of
an
attorney
failing
to
check
the
work
performed
by
AI,
Gordon
Rees
—
a
firm
that
brought
in
$759,869,000
gross
revenue
in
2024,
putting
it
at
No.
71
on
the
Am
Law
100
—
found
itself
apologizing
profusely
to
a
judge
and
all
parties
affected,
saying
its
attorneys
were
“profoundly
embarrassed”
after
submitting
a
bankruptcy
filing
that
was
riddled
with
“inaccurate
and
non-existent
citations.”
Reuters
has
additional
details
on
this
benchslap
brought
on
by
an
AI-handicapped
court
filing:
Gordon
Rees
and
some
of
its
lawyers
submitted
the
filings
ahead
of
a
hearing
scheduled
for
Tuesday
before
U.S.
Bankruptcy
Judge
Christopher
Hawkins
in
Montgomery[,
Alabama].Hawkins
in
August
had
asked
the
firm
and
Cassie
Preston,
the
lawyer
representing
creditor
Progressive
Perfusion,
to
explain
why
they
should
not
be
sanctioned
after
submitting
a
filing
with
what
the
judge
called
“pervasive
inaccurate,
misleading,
and
fabricated
citations,
quotations,
and
representations
of
legal
authority.”
Gordon
Rees
—
a
firm
with
1,800
lawyers
that
has
an
office
in
every
state
in
the
country
—
is
now
one
of
the
largest
law
firms
(joining
K&L
Gates
on
this
front)
to
face
potential
sanctions
over
the
misuse
of
AI.
In
response
to
the
court’s
order
to
show
cause,
Preston
said
that
while
she
“did
not
personally
use
generative
AI
to
prepare
the
filing,
she
was
aware
that
generative
AI
was
used.”
She
went
on
to
ask
that
the
court
“show
mercy,”
further
stating
that
“[t]here
can
be
little
doubt
that
[she
would]
lose
her
job
and
source
of
income
for
her
family
because
of
her
actions
in
this
matter.”
At
this
time,
Preston’s
profile
is
still
available
on
the
Gordon
Rees
site.
For
its
part,
Gordon
Rees
said
it
had
updated
its
AI
policies
to
include
a
“cite
checking
policy,”
and
would
accept
any
sanctions
the
court
imposed.
This
should
be
a
cautionary
tale
for
all
lawyers
and
law
firms
—
artificial
intelligence
can
certainly
speed
things
up,
but
it
can
in
no
way
replace
the
fundamentals
of
law
practice.
Robust
human
oversight
is
still
needed
when
it
comes
to
AI
usage,
because
as
Gordon
Rees
just
learned,
when
you
submit
something
to
a
judge,
it
needs
to
be
based
in
fact,
not
hallucination.
Large
US
law
firm
apologizes
for
AI
errors
in
bankruptcy
court
filing
[Reuters]
Staci
Zaretsky is
the
managing
editor
of
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.