- law dawg
- 36 Comments
- 1791 Views
- Judge Ron Israel went beyond attorney negotiations in sentencing for causing fatal Las Vegas crash while driving home from bar. [RJ]
- Prosecutors think Las Vegas attorney used AI. He says it was just a typo. [RJ]
- Nevada school zone safety law doubles fines for reckless driving (speeding, u-turns, etc) starting today. [KTNV]
I’m willing to give Dean Kajioka the benefit of the doubt. He is a better attorney than 90% of you
This case seems like more than a typo. I suspect he’s probably covering for an associate or clerk who used AI because ultimately his name is on the pleading and he had the ultimate duty and being noble by not throwing someone under the bus.
100%. I went on Kalshi earlier and bet the moneyline on “Paralegal Used AI.” If it’s AI (which we don’t know yet), you call it out and the court denies the motion. Way too much news coverage over this nothingburrito.
I’m also sympathetic to Dean, I like the guy, but it looks like the problem here is repetition and/or doubling down. I’ve seen judges bust attorneys for far worse AI violations, but this is the one the media has latched on to.
The DA’s Office here is something else. They like to bash the defense. They get away with a lot. They practice in a pro state legal system and still are over the top. Kajoika is a decent lawyer. Even good lawyers make mistakes. A mountain out of a molehill. Don’t folks remember the cut and paste days. For years stock motions had miscites and incorrect statements of the law that circulated for years.
Cut and paste. Those were the days.
I call it “artisinal lawyering”!
I’m sorry, what “pro state legal system” are you referring to? The one where nearly every defendant is booked and released as a matter of course? Where most felony cases result in misdemeanor convictions? Where every serious case needs to be indicted because most justice court judges won’t find probable cause? Where most judges just rule in defendant’s favor to avoid the chance of an appeal? Where anyone on probation is now effectively immune from being sent to prison for violating their probation? Let’s be real, the system has swung far to the benefit of the defendants.
“Let’s be real, the system has swung far to the benefit of the defendants.” Say wha now? My friend, I do not think you and I occupy the same reality.
if you’re not getting cases bound up after a prelim, sounds like it’s a skill issue ngl
Multiple Judicial PDs are diametically opposed to following the law or comprehending evidence because it generally doesn’t benefit their quasi-clientele. They are not there to be neutral, detached magistrates who faithfully apply the law. This is the judicial branch’s version of regulatory capture.
the DA’s office still loves to cut and paste; specifically, they love to just cut and paste in big ol’ block quotes from orders, PSIs, etc. Laziness abounds.
…are we discussing the disparate workloads of the DA’s office versus the PD’s office? Tell me again which office works exclusively from home and gets three-day weekends.
Why is everyone pretending that AI is abhorrent? We use artificial intelligence every day. Spell check? AI. LexisNexis broad search with narrow results? AI. Our own expert “photomodeling” software? AI. Our experts probably summarize medical records with AI.
Artificial intelligence is a tool in our toolchest that can be used to the benefit of our clients. Why do we use tape measures? Because its a tool to help us.
The integration of AI into our jobs is inevitable and is already happening (i.e. carrier billing cuts). I agree that you can’t just rubber stamp and file whatever AI gives you (and if you do you should be sanctioned) but to try and eliminate AI into our lives seems like a foolish endeavor. Its just a matter of time until its integrated into all aspects of our jobs.
No problem with using AI from my perspective, but it doesn’t substitute for cite-checking on your own to make sure the case actually exists. And if you know your field, you should be able to tell if something sounds “off,” prompting a need to verify the quote/summary of holding, etc. That still only takes a fraction of the time you would spend doing the whole thing from scratch.
I don’t practice criminal law but I tried to download the brief. It seems any time the hallucinated/erroneous case was cited it was in conjunction with other cases. If the other cases generally support his position then nbd, if they don’t, it’s just like making an authority up and there should be some reprimand. But I have seen lawyers cite published cases for propositions that appear nowhere in the actual opinions – this happened pre generative AI and is likely still happening. If the erroneous case was offered as binding authority for a proposition Nevada law does not accept, it should be treated like any attorney mischaracterizing the law with authority that does not support the position.
You make such a great point here. Everyone is hung up on hallucinations, but attorneys have been citing authority that doesn’t support the stated proposition for as long as I’ve been practicing law. So many times I’ve busted opposing counsel, pre-AI, and judges didn’t do a damn thing. Now, with AI it’s suddenly murder. Come on now.
I remember being taught in law school that mis-citing the law to a judge would result in sanctions, a bar referral, your reputation being destroyed, dogs and cats living together, etc. In practice I routinely see attorneys place allegedly verbatim quotes from cases in their pleadings that are completely fabricated or directly misstate the actual holding. What happens? Nothing. No big deal. Massive ethical and professional no-nos, just shrugged off and everyone moves on.
Why do we care anymore if judges don’t either? Hell with it, I’ll cite to Harry Potter and use emojis instead of roman numerals, maybe just draw a picture of a cat in an affidavit.
Can we get back to a place where rules matter? Maybe it’s a slippery slope fallacy but I want to believe we’re not rapidly sliding into an idiocracy.
BAD CITES are OVER THE LINE! This isn’t Vietnam, this is Nevada civil litigation, there are rules! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vB9U2hx6Qg
I did NOT lose a leg in Vietnam so that attorneys can mis-cite their briefs.
God damn you, 1:49 PM! 1:49 PM, I love you, but sooner or later, you’re going to have to face the fact you’re a goddamn moron. God damn you, 1:49 PM!
I am entertained
That’s where good old signals save the day. “See generally,” “Cf.”, and “See e.g.” create the kind of grey-area wiggle room one can wrap themselves in like a warm baby blanket.
The dog barks and the caravan moves on.
Way to go, Judge Israel. Judges need to stop being rubber stamps.
I’m just shocked he showed up and issued a ruling. If only civil could get the same consideration.
We had one with him where the motion was on his Chambers calendar (when are civil motions not) and he decided it 9 months later once the issue became moot.
9 months? Sounds like a bankruptcy case (IYKYK)
AI won’t go away. It is just one more thing a lawyer has to check and be wary. It may be that way until, and if, the ABA declares a particular version/vendor’s AI to be as accurate as the official reporters.
“…until, and if, the ABA declares a particular version/vendor’s AI to be as accurate as the official reporters.” That’ll be the final cash gab and fuck you from the Boomers, America’s greatest generation.
Danielle Tarmu going after basically the entire EJDC is sending me!! She isn’t naming names but her social media is ruthless.
She’s awesome!
What social media? Instagram? Facebook?
Deets! Links!
She’s mostly on MeowMeowBeenz, WUPHF, Gryzzl, and Entertainment 720.
What are those things?