US | United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Docket: 22-2057 • appellate
2024-01-30
Park v. Kim — per curiam opinion
ChatGPT no human verificationfake case citationuse of generative ai for legal research
I. Executive Summary
The court addressed counsel’s admission that she cited a non-existent state-court decision in a reply brief after relying on ChatGPT to identify precedent.
The court stated this conduct fell below basic obligations of counsel. It referred the attorney to the court’s grievance panel and ordered her to provide the decision to her client.
II. Conduct Analysis
Appellate counsel used ChatGPT to locate supporting precedent, cited a non-existent decision in a filed brief, and failed to read or verify the decision’s existence or content before submitting it.
III. Legal Foundations
Applicable procedural rules and judicial ethics codes.
IV. Key Facts
1) Counsel admitted that a case cited in her reply brief did not exist.
2) Counsel reported she relied on ChatGPT to identify precedent and did not confirm validity before citing it.
3) The court treated this as a serious breach of counsel’s basic obligations and acted on it in the opinion.
V. Consequences & Sanction
1) The attorney was referred to the court’s grievance panel.
2) The attorney was ordered to furnish a copy of the decision to her client.