Federal Civil Litigation in the Age of Generative AI
Increasingly, attorneys use various generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in the practice of law. These tools purport to provide targeted answers to specific legal questions and they can be used to facilitate review and drafting of legal documents as well as aid in due diligence assignments, along with various other legal tasks. In response to the rapid rise of generative AI tools in the legal profession, state bar associations have published recommendations on the issue. For instance, in 2023, the California State Bar Association issued practical guidance to attorneys on generative AI in the legal profession. Florida followed suit by issuing an advisory opinion on the topic. Similarly, the American Bar Associationalso released a formal opinion on generative AI tools in 2024.
In her article, Rule 11 is No Match for Generative AI, Professor Jessica R. Gunder offers an impressive contribution to both the law-and-technology and civil procedure fields by exposing the limits of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 in addressing “fictitious cases and false statements of law” that arise from attorneys’ use of generative AI. Gunder convincingly argues that although courts have used Rule 11 to sanction attorneys who fail to conduct sufficient legal research, Rule 11 cannot adequately regulate this behavior in the generative AI context. She goes on to contend that Rule 11’s inadequacies have likely led a growing number of courts to issue standing orders to directly address attorneys’ misuse of generative AI in legal proceedings. Continue reading "Federal Civil Litigation in the Age of Generative AI"
