
The most precise thing I read this week about AI and the law:
“He fails to mention that GenAI hasn’t created a verification crisis for legal research, it has revealed one.
For decades, litigation practice has tolerated:
(i) template-based arguments with inherited citations,
(ii) reliance on headnotes instead of underlying reasons, and
(ii) recycled factums passed from junior to junior.
GenAI didn’t cause this prior behaviour, but it is now shining a very bright light upon it.
Instead of blaming the technology and suggesting that it is causing problems, we should thank it for surfacing real problems in the profession.”

Leave a comment