AI on Trial: How AI is transforming how legal work is done

THOUSAND PALMS, Calif. (KESQ) - They say – a man who is his own lawyer – has a fool for a client, but – perhaps not – if you’ve got the knowledge of the entire internet -- and artificial intelligence on your side.

"What AI did is it gave me a perspective that I never had before," said Melissa Corona, who is using AI in a current legal case.

Corona is currently in the middle of a family law case. It's intricate —  involving international laws. She has a lawyer in Palm Desert – but Corona is saving her attorney time for more complicated issues – and in the meantime -- using AI to handle the more minor tasks – like writing briefs.

"When I began to self-represent part-time, I realized how efficient and how I was prevailing in certain areas because of this tool that you know, within 10 seconds, it gives you a response," Corona said.

And she’s actually won -- on those motions. It’s saved her thousands of dollars so far. 

"It's like a game of chess, almost, and I felt stumped at times where I thought, Oh, this is going to cost me a lot to figure out," Corona said.

In a world in which law firms can charge up to $4,000 per hour, every second matters. As AI becomes normalized, more people are using it to help in their legal cases. Some are even using AI to replace lawyers entirely.

Most of us are probably conversational in legalese.  We know what an arraignment or an affidavit is. But you get a little deeper – and you start coming across terms like prima facie or res ipsa loquitur –, and you may start getting lost. Common tongue to lawyers – but not the rest of us. 

Enter AI

Hey ChatGPT – the judge wants me to submit a brief on my case.  Say I broke into a car, but only because someone stole my car and I was taking it back. Write me a compelling brief explaining why I should win.

And there it is, a brief that could have taken a lawyer hours to draft, done in a matter of seconds.

But all of this comes with a warning – caveat emptor.

"AI can be an excellent tool, and that's what it is. It's a tool, and it's only as good as the person using it," said Andrew Montez, an attorney at Roemer & Harnik LLP.

Montez is based in Indian Wells – and he says — he has seen more people in the past year using AI to self-represent. 

"Absolutely, in my practice, we see pro PERS, those without attorneys, using AI constantly. It's easily recognizable, because you get excellent work product that isn't always correct," Montez said.

And that's because AI has been known to hallucinate — to make up fake evidence to support a case.

French attorney and data scientist Damien Charlotin has created a public database of worldwide cases in which people were caught using AI that faked evidence. 

65 so far — happened in California – many of them here in SoCal.

The punishment for using AI that makes up nonsense citations and wasting the court’s time can be harsh, including thousands of dollars in penalties.

"This kind of applications used to be five pages Max, written by the people themselves, badly spelled, barely a legal case. And now, suddenly they've got 120 pages, perfectly formatted. May be full of hallucinations, who knows. But still, they not only is the number of cases increasing, but also the number of the materials that comes with it," Charlotin said.

The ease of AI has also led to a flood of filings.

"So we're seeing more lawsuits, you think because of AI," Angela asked Charlotin.

Charlotin answered, "Oh yes, definitely that we've seen not only in the US, but across most jurisdictions, and especially courts and tribunals that accept self-represented litigants."

And it’s not just plaintiffs using AI. Lawyers themselves are using AI – and sometimes – disastrously. Montez says he recently went up against opposing counsel, who seemed to have an airtight case against him.

"The opposition was fantastic. It was well written. It was convincing. It had had authority that I had never seen before. And at first glance, I was flummoxed that I had missed these cases, which were on point that were in exact opposition to what I had made, because if what the opposition said was accurate, I had no basis for my motion," Montez said. "And as I'm looking deeper into these cases, I'm realizing they don't exist. There's entire quotes which are entirely fabricated. As I'm reviewing this, I'm realizing this is ChatGPT."

Montez said it had hallucinated. Opposing counsel had completely made up evidence against him

"So the court sanctioned that attorney. He was sanctioned. Had to pay money to the court clerk, and he was ordered to write letters of apology," Montez said.

Attorneys all over the world have been fined or fired for using AI to fabricate cases. Montez says as an attorney, if you're not competent at using AI, you shouldn't be using it.

"There are ways to use AI ethically, morally, legally, in practice of law, that's no question. But when you use AI without those safeguards, it can go very wrong," Montez said.

With the advent of AI, Montez says to always ask if your attorney uses AI.

"California guidelines are very clear, an attorney cannot charge you for the amount of time they saved when using AI," Montez said.

"My point has always been that, as a lawyer, there's so many things that a robot will be doing better than you, and you should let as a computer do this kind of very stupid and tedious stuff," Charlotin said.

For lawyers, AI can become a gift of time back, speeding up tedious, drudging work in a matter of minutes. For everyone else, AI can mean empowerment and a fighting chance where there was none before. 

"If it wasn't for AI, I don't see how I could have prevailed in this case," Corona said.

With all its flaws, will AI help or hurt the integrity of the law? The jury is still out. 

Late last month, the California Senate passed legislation, SB 574, that would change guidance on AI by the bar to enforceable statutory requirements. It reflects a heightened awareness of the risks of AI in the legal system.

The bill now goes to the state assembly for further review.