NY lawyer, who used ChatGPT to create 'bogus' court documents, apologises; seeks relief from judge

Last month, Steven Schwartz, a lawyer with Levidow, Levidow & Oberman in the US state of New York, made international headlines after he used ChatGPT for a legal filing wherein the artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot cited several non-existent cases as part of the research brief. On Thursday, Schwartz appeared before the Manhattan federal court and profusely apologised to the judge for his unethical actions.

Schwartz said he was "humiliated" and that his actions had brought personal and professional shame.

“I would like to sincerely apologise to your honour, to this court, to the defendants, to my firm," said Schwartz during the hearing.

“I deeply regret my actions in this manner that led to this hearing today. I suffered both professionally and personally [because of] the widespread publicity this issue has generated. I am both embarrassed, humiliated and extremely remorseful," he added.

Schwartz said he did not know the AI chatbot was capable of furnishing bogus citations.

"I simply had no idea that ChatGPT was capable of fabricating entire case citations or judicial opinions, especially in a manner that appeared authentic. At the time that I performed the legal research in this case, I believed that ChatGPT was a reliable search engine. I now know that was incorrect," he wrote.

Meanwhile, the judge said he would rule on whether to issue sanctions at a later date.

What is the case about?

A man named Roberto Mata sued the airline Avianca, saying he was injured when a serving cart struck his knee ona flight to the Kennedy International Airport in New York. As per the lawsuit, Mata was a passenger on Aviance Flight 670 from El Salvador to New York on August 27, 2019, when an airline employee bonked him with the metal serving cart.

When Avianca asked a Manhattan federal judge to toss out the case, Mata's lawyers, which included Schwartz objected and submitted a 10-page brief in March that cited over half a dozen relevant court decisions. The brief cited Martinez v. Delta Air Lines, Zicherman v. Korean Air Lines, Varghese v. China Southern Airlines and a few other cases, according to the New York Times report which first carried the news.

However, upon searching the citations mentioned, both the airline lawyers as well as the judge returned empty-handed. They could not find anything related to the case and in a May 4 order, the judge found that six of the submitted cases by Schwartz as research for the brief appeared to be bogus judicial decisions with bogus quotes and internal citations

"The court is presented with unprecedented circumstances. Six of the submitted cases appear to be bogus judicial decisions with bogus quotes and bogus internal citations," Judge Castel wrote last month.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE: