Legislators Delay $200,000 Alabama Legal Contract Over AI-Generated Court Filings
The Alabama Department of Corrections (ADOC) contract with law firm Butler Snow, valued at $200,000, has been paused after three attorneys were found submitting court filings containing fabricated case law generated by ChatGPT. The Contract Review Committee made the decision on Thursday to put the contract on hold.
State Representative Chris England (D-Tuscaloosa) expressed concerns, stating, “As an Alabama taxpayer, when you see cases pending for a long time and find out that the representation involves AI-generated motions, you start questioning whether a different law firm is needed.”
Judicial and Bar Review Underway
U.S. District Judge Anna Manasco of the Northern District of Alabama condemned the conduct of attorneys Matthew Reeves, William Cranford, and William Lunsford last month. The judge’s order will be reviewed by the Alabama State Bar. Lunsford has historically received millions from the state for defending ADOC in multiple lawsuits.
The issue came to light after lawyers representing Frankie Johnson, an incarcerated plaintiff suing former ADOC Commissioner Jeff Dunn, alleged that defense counsel relied on fictitious legal precedents. Judge Manasco ordered the implicated attorneys to appear in court in May following these allegations.
Comments from the Attorney General’s Office
Clay Crenshaw, chief deputy Alabama Attorney General, addressed the matter during Thursday’s hearing. He confirmed that the attorney primarily responsible for the AI-generated fake citations has been removed from all DOC-related cases.
Crenshaw clarified, “There was extensive review by Butler Snow and an independent firm that found one document containing three or four AI-generated, fake citations. The lawyer most responsible for that document has been removed.” He added that although Lunsford was sanctioned, his involvement was limited to that single document among hundreds filed, describing it as a one-time mistake.
Implications for Legal Professionals
This case highlights the risks of incorporating AI tools in legal work without thorough verification. Courts and oversight bodies are increasing scrutiny over AI-generated content, especially when it affects case law accuracy and professional integrity.
Legal teams should establish clear standards for AI use, including rigorous review of any AI-assisted drafting. Failure to do so can damage reputations, lead to sanctions, and jeopardize contracts.
- Review court filings carefully for accuracy.
- Implement guidelines for responsible AI use in legal drafting.
- Stay informed on evolving ethical standards regarding AI in legal practice.
For legal professionals interested in responsible AI integration and training, resources are available at Complete AI Training – ChatGPT courses.
Your membership also unlocks:
