Related Posts
Happy Thursday 🐠

Tagline for award shows post COVID
So what’s the plan tomorrow?
Anyone wanna come over? Brooklyn
Additional Posts in Law
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.




I also just want to add that there’s nothing wrong with using AI for legal research and that shouldn’t be a concern. The concern is whether or not you reviewed the cases properly.
Correct.
convo over coffee, frame it as seeking feedback on when to incorporate previously cited cases earlier in the briefing vs bringing in new case law. i think it’s entirely appropriate to insist AI was not involved in the draft but you should fall on your sword about misinterpreting the cases (annoying, i know) and get in a line about how you will be more diligent about catching similar errors in the future. ultimately it doesn’t matter whether he thinks you used Harvey or some other AI program, he probably just wants to know you hear his feedback and are committed to learning.
👆this. You made a mistake. He assumed a cause that was incorrect. That’s on him. You still made a mistake. That’s on you. It’s ok. We all make mistakes. All. The. Time. Good lawyers learn from them and move on. I love SA’s suggestion of coffee to clear the air, get a little mentoring and bonding time, and move on.
Not using AI at this point is borderline malpractice. Institutional clients of our firm have mandated that we use it for certain tasks.
Your boss’ fear of technology is the most concerning part of this. He’s going to be left behind. Don’t tie your fortunes to him.
I can think of many things that are borderline malpractice, but failure to use AI did not make the list. Is it a great tool that needs to embraced, but poor use of AI costly for a firm. Embarrassment and loss of credibility aside, the courts are handing out heavy sanctions for unchecked AI use. This partner went about it the wrong way, but I do not think the concern is off base.
OP seeking feedback and a productive discussion is appropriate. Hopefully the partner is receptive.
Quittin’ time.
Sounds like you should have used AI to check your citations.
I think the most important question is did you get the law right even if the citations weren’t the best? He could have glossed over the citations in the original motion.
It’s also kind of easy to mail it in on a reply. He could have been critiquing the writing in general without literally accusing you of using AI.
I respectfully disagree about elevating it to the level of discussing over coffee. If it were me, after I got done talking about something else, I would just ask “do you really think I used AI?” The answer is probably no. And you probably won’t like what is the actual critique. But it could be nothing and he was in a bad mood.
Either way I don’t think I would let a comment about sanctionable conduct linger.
Isn’t your research history saved on lexis/westlaw?
I would absolutely send your paper trail. Personally, I would rip him a new one for such an accusation but this is why I don't work in firms anymore.