- law dawg
- 28 Comments
- 3338 Views
- Decades-old abortion law ruled unconstitutional by Nevada Supreme Court. [TNI; RJ]
- Judge raises bail to $1M for CCSD teacher indicted on 46 child sex counts. [RJ]
- Lombardo pushes back on ‘cover-up’ claims. [8NewsNow]
- Las Vegas woman says fake jury duty scam cost her $12,500 through Bitcoin ATM. [KTNV]
- Boyd School of Law Launches New Course on the Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Legal Practice. [UNLV Boyd]
- With support from AI, more pro se cases hit the dockets. [ABA Journal]
If someone asks you to pay them through a bitcoin ATM, there is a 90+% it’s a scam.
Westlaw will soon begin incorporating Claude into its subscriptions. And here I thought Westlaw would continue being a safe space from hallucinated legal interpretations and arguments.
West Law, Lexis were the go to resources. It’s kind of sad to see them fading away.
Kudos to Boyd for implementing an AI course. Hopefully, they also teach some AI skills, and not just ethics. That being said, and I mean no disrespect when I say this, isn’t the utility of this course going to be limited by the fact that these two professors have not practiced law in many years? And presumably, they’ve never actually practiced law in the A.I. era?
Joe is an expert in using AI in legal writing. I don’t believe he practices but, then again, Bryan Garner hasn’t practiced in like 40 years.
“Joe is an expert in using AI in legal writing.” How did he acquire this expertise?
He’s an android, obviously.
Did he submit AI-riddled paperwork to Washoe Court and get sanctioned? Cause that is something they’ve done that I can 100% get on board with EJDC doing.
You know how the local rules in reno have an affirmation that someones social number isnt in the pleadings? I feel like courts are going to implement an affirmation like “I affirm AI wasnt used in the creation of this document” signed attorney X.
I affirm, under penalty of perjury, that this filing was chiseled into stone using a hammer and pick. I further affirm that I did not, in any way, directly or indirectly, use that blasphemous, new fangled Gutenberg press while drafting this stone age pleading. /s/ 3:04 PM (apparently)
I appreciate the wit and sarcasm.However, I have used AI and found it useful for focusing on a point of law with which I was unfamiliar. Once I have the AI snapshot I do my own research. On detail and factual application AI has been misleading and sometimes flatly wrong.
AI is good for getting you in the right direction, but not so good at providing you with end results
It is far more capable than that.
Don’t bet your license on that
5:45 PM. 4:41 PM here. I am not betting my license on the accuracy of AI. You assume that the extent of AI is primarily or exclusively an issue of accuracy. I am here to tell you that it is not. Sometimes, I wish I could compare notes with people, but I am also reluctant to cede any edge that I have. If you are only using AI to help write, well, you are far behind me.
Don’t bother explaining something to someone that thought the fax machine was better than learning what a pdf is.
A lot of boomer and gen-xers on this thread that still pretend like it’s 2024 and AI can’t handle all of the mistakes that have pointed out. Halluncinations are next to nonexistent now. If you know how to actually craft a good prompt, it can complete about 75% of legal work, even as much as motion work, settlement/mediation briefs, ALL discovery, etc.
At this point, it should be considered legal malpractice to NOT use AI in every and all aspects of our practice.
Stop with the 2 sentence BS prompts, start paying for the pro version of your preferred LLM. If you’re using ChatGPT you’re doing it wrong. Understand how memory and project knowledge work.
Honestly, I love how reluctant most attorneys in Nevada are when it comes to AI. Gives me that edge, and I’ve already used it to overwhelm multiple opposing counsel, who are often old and stuck in their ways.
Older Gen X 25+ practice.
Agreed wholeheartedly. Its all about the prompts. The more detail the better. But for crying out loud. If you aren’t using, you’re the fool.
It’s cut my time by 1/3 – 1/2 on nearly all tasks. I almost feel lazy, at times. Where I used to spend an hour crafting a precise and persuasive letter, I can type the prompts, draft the letter and review for accuracy and either quickly revise with my preferences or add additional prompts for a redraft and all this in 30 minutes or less.
So much more efficient.
BINGO BINGO – agreed 100%
End of an era- Saw Gardner Jolley resigned from the Bar. The adage of better to burn out than to fade away is not true for everyone.
Gardner did not like or respect me, but I found his personality interesting and enjoyed the challenge of litigating against him.
He called me stupid and I never spoke to him again. I think he too often voiced similar opinions.
That’s exactly why I didn’t take personally. I had already heard the stories. It actually made it kind of fun. He would insult me, I would laugh (genuinely) and he would go back to the well for another zinger. In all seriousness, that relentlessness is part of what made him an effective advocate.
That is not how I like to practice law. Or life.
Bridget Robb Sentencing. $22,663 in restitution and enroll in mental health counseling for a minimum of six months. Robb is also ordered to complete 100 hours of community service, as requested by the victim.
https://thisisreno.com/2026/05/bridget-robb-stalking-sentence/
The pro se AI-assisted filing surge is, at bottom, a family law problem — and family law cured this years ago, or tried to. I have covered the unbundled-representation frameworks at CLE presentations more than once; the audience is never large enough. What the ABA piece misses entirely is the fee structure: a pro se litigant who generates four defective motions with an AI assistant has not saved money, he has generated billable work for whoever cleans up the mess on the other side. I count at minimum three chargeable engagements in the average contested matter this dynamic produces. As someone AV-rated preeminent for longer than Boyd has had a law school, I find the framing of AI assistance as democratization to be, frankly, a position the record does not support once you run the math.
This AI slop being filed, is a problem for sure. 10 – 25 years ago, there was a solid business for my firm in cleaning up post-Joint Petition cases. In countless consults and in general conversation, I informed everyone that would listen that its far cheaper to get an attorney to draft the Joint Petition and cover all of the bases that shouldnt be litigated in the future.
The self help forms are great, but the parties never get it all right for all of their good intentions. Something is always missed or amiss.
The $2500 I charged back then was well preferable to the $5000 – $7500 retainer to un-fuck the well intentioned pro se Joint Petitions. I have done dozens of these over the years.
AI assisted filings is not at all limited to family law. Foreclosures and consumer finance more generally is inundated too.