Courts in New Mexico, California and Tasmania confront AI-fabricated legal material

In New Mexico, the state Supreme Court found attorney Stephen Aarons in direct contempt after his brief in a murder appeal attributed testimony to witnesses who do not exist, according to the court's order, quoted by Eugene Volokh at Reason. Aarons acknowledged using ChatGPT and not verifying the brief's facts or citations. The court fined him $5,000, referred him to the disciplinary board, struck the briefing and appointed the public defender's office for his client.

In Los Angeles, Superior Court Judge Elizabeth Bradley fined Jacquelene Robinson of Musick, Peeler & Garrett $999.99 after motions filed for State Farm cited seven nonexistent cases, Law Commentary reported. Robinson said she used the research tool Irys, believing it was linked to her firm's Westlaw subscription, and apologized. The outlet noted the amount is one cent below the threshold at which California courts generally must notify the State Bar.

In Tasmania, the ABC reported that a parole board document defending a media ban on convicted murderer Susan Neill-Fraser cited nonexistent case law. The Supreme Court ruled the condition invalid, and Attorney-General Guy Barnett is seeking an explanation from the board.