I feel like being disbarred is a good punishment how come that wasn’t it?
It’s basically what the first one does; being ‘referred to the bar association’ is, generally, not going to go well for the one referred.
One would think that an attorney, even a mildly dumb one, would understand the exacting nature of their profession. Maybe they were under pressure to produce more work than they were capable of? I understand that’s a common thing in the legal field.
While the buck stops with the attorney, I got questions for the law firm.
They’ll pay. The judge should have asked for at least ten times as much.
Should’ve been ‘and’.
Fine with that.
They can pay, sure, but that option also means potential disbarment.
Any fine is a paltry sum compared to getting a lawyer’s license thrown in the bin.
tl;dr, the punishment is to choose one:
- Pay a $2,500 fine, be removed from the case, and receive a referral to the Bar Association. This is professional misconduct and would probably put their licence to practise at risk.
- Write a letter confessing their use of AI to their former law school deans and Bar Association officials, and offer to lecture on the appropriate use of AI in professional settings.
I mean the second one is cute and all but I prefer the first one. That’s what I want all of them facing.
Honestly, should be both and the lecture should start with “Here is how I fucked up…” Discipline and shame together, not discipline or shame.
The judge doesn’t have unlimited leniency, of course. But while this technology is still new, the court has an interest in educating lawyers about the fact that this is not, in fact, acceptable behaviour in court and will result in punishment. The second option helps achieve that goal while it is still relatively new and unheard of. But I’m betting that if this judge sees the same thing again from another lawyer, they will just be fined and referred to the Bar immediately and this choice will not be offered.
