Artificial Intelligence: Reliability in Legal Drafting

By: Lucas T. Robinson, Esq. of Pierce and Mandell, P.C.

Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) has become the most prevalent new technology to impact multiple fields of work since the emergence of computers and phones. People have been finding ways to use the new technology in their lives, from researching recipes to completing reports for their jobs. However, the legal field has numerous hurdles that prevent AI from being as effective a tool as in other fields of work. Our personal experience with these technologies shows the problems that lawyers face today with this emergent technology. Below, we describe a case in which AI has negatively impacted legal work and provide solutions for other lawyers to avoid similar mistakes.

In 2025, we moved for a motion for summary judgment against a plaintiff in a matter involving insurance coverage for a workplace injury. In the plaintiff’s opposition, they cited a case that no one at our firm had heard of before. We asked plaintiff’s counsel for a copy of the case, but he instead stated that he wanted to submit a revision of his opposition. We began to conduct a diligent search of this case and all came to the same conclusion: the case did not exist. Upon bringing this to the attention of plaintiff’s counsel, he refused to admit to the mistake or acknowledge any wrongdoing. We brought this issue to the court's attention during the motion hearing, with counsel offering no explanation for why he included the case or where he found it. Following the hearing, the case was dismissed in its entirety by plaintiff’s counsel.

We saw only one way that an attorney could cite to a non-existent case with quoted language: AI. While the tool may make the process of writing painstakingly long reports and memoranda seem like a breeze, the technology is not built for the requirements of the legal field just yet. Such a misstep is directly against the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure. Unfortunately, a scenario like the one described above is becoming more commonplace. The use of fictitious cases has led to disciplinary actions against attorneys throughout the nation, including in Massachusetts.

If you choose to use AI in writing your legal papers, here are some things you should keep in mind:

1. Check All Your Sources!

A paper generated by AI may offer you numerous sources with provide backing to the position you are arguing. However, they may not be actual legal precedents. Be sure to go through each source you are provided to check 1.) whether it is a real source, 2.) whether the source was cited correctly, 3.) whether the information referenced is actually from the source. On occasion, AI may cite a fake case, but use real legal precedent. If you are unable to find the case, search for the information that the case was citing. Be sure to never get too comfortable with AI. Even if you do see no issues on multiple occasions, the one time you don’t check could be the most costly.

2. Use Outlines Over Full Reports.

AI is a very useful tool for helping outline a path to complete a project. It can suggest where to put certain information to make your arguments pop and provide a guideline to break down large tasks. Instead of trying to have AI do these tasks for you, look at using the technology to facilitate a smoother transition between tasks. This allows for less time figuring out what you need to do next while avoiding the major pitfall of AI described above.

3. We Are Lawyers For a Reason.

AI is a useful technology, but people are not hiring AI outright for a number of reasons. In the legal profession, lawyers spend years learning the ins and outs of the legal system and how to navigate different issues that arise in cases. Like every generation of attorneys before us, we have specific knowledge in a highly sought-after field and should not need to rely on such technologies to do our jobs. When using AI, remember that you have critical thinking abilities that this infant technology does not. Do not be beholden to the narrative given by AI when using the technology and be sure to put your own thoughts and analysis into the work. We are professionals of law and should be able to show the importance of our profession.

As AI continues to advance, we will see more and more issues happen like the one I described above. However, if you remember the three points of this article, you will be better equipped to handle the emergence of this new technology and use your skills as a lawyer to incorporate it into your work.

Pierce & Mandell tries civil cases of all varieties, and has a team of seasoned trial lawyers ready to bring cases to verdict, in some cases, on short notice. Have a case? Contact Pierce & Mandell today at (617) 720-2444.

¹M.R.C.P. Rule 11(a) (“The signature of any attorney to a pleading constitutes a certificate that the attorney has read the pleading; that to the best of the attorney's knowledge, information, and belief there is a good ground to support it; and that it is not interposed for delay… For a willful violation of this rule an attorney may be subjected to appropriate disciplinary action.”

²Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers, (2025, April 30) Public Reprimand No. 2025-2, https://bbopublic.massbbo.org/web/f/PR2025-2.pdf. (Attorney sanctioned $2,000.00 and reprimanded by BBO as a result of including multiple non-existent cases in opposition.)

< Go Back...