Problems Using Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers’ Tasks – Ethical Issues

Snell v. United Specialty Ins. Co._ 102 F.4th 1208 Mata v. Avianca_ Inc._ 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94323

On August 12, we will discuss Mata v. Avianca, Inc. 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94323 (S.D.N.Y. May 4, 2023). In response to a motion to dismiss, the attorney in Mata cited Varghese v China South Airlines Ltd., 925 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 2019), which he found using artificial intelligence. Varghese is not a real case; it’s an AI hallucination.

AI raises many ethical issues. We will consider courts’ and the bar’s treatment of AI, and an extensive and well-written concurrence in Snell v. United Specialty Ins. Co. 102 F. 4th 1208 (11th Cir. 2024), by Judge Kevin Newson about using large language model definitions for interpreting contracts, statutes, and other legal documents.

We also will look at the California Rules of Professional Conduct and sections of the Business & Professional Code that may affect uses of AI.