Matter of Samuel

Ficha del Equipo Editorial a partir de la base mundial AI Hallucination Cases de Damien Charlotin. Verifica siempre en la fuente original.

El 11 de enero de 2024, NY Country Court (Estados Unidos) conoció un asunto en el que un abogado se apoyó en una IA generativa no identificada y el expediente registró contenido alucinado.

Qué se alucinó

• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Reply brief dated Oct. 11, 2023 cited five of six cases that the court found were erroneous or nonexistent after a simple Lexis/Westlaw check.
• Tergiversación de jurisprudencia. Reply brief asserted material factual statements about case law and court holdings that the court determined were false.
• Tergiversación de norma legal. Argued that appointment of an Article 81 guardian meant the decedent lacked testamentary capacity as a matter of law; court held this is an incorrect reading of the law.
• Tergiversación de norma legal. Argued that a guardian must obtain Supreme Court authority to allow the ward to execute a will; court held no such requirement exists and the O&J did not prohibit the decedent from executing or revoking a will.
• Tergiversación de norma legal. Suggested the O&J should include provisions for changing/revising/removing a previously drafted will; court noted no one, including a guardian, can execute a will for another and such provisions are not part of guardianship orders.
• Tergiversación de norma legal. Claimed an attorney drafter must obtain medical professional input when drafting a new will; court stated no such requirement exists.
• Tergiversación de norma legal. Asserted that an Article 81 guardian is automatically in a position of undue influence over the ward; court rejected any automatic presumption.
• Tergiversación de norma legal. Argued undue influence was 'abundantly clear' merely because the guardian was named executor/beneficiary; court explained such facts alone do not establish undue influence.
• Tergiversación de norma legal. Implied that because the drafting attorney also represented the guardian in the Article 81 case, the decedent could not have been of sound mind; court held this is a question of fact, not a per se rule.

Desenlace

Striking of Filing + Sanctions Hearing Scheduled. Sanción profesional: No.

Ficha del caso

Fuentes: aporte de https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/233/Matter_of_Samuel_NY_Court_January_11_2024.pdf; base de datos de Damien Charlotin.

¿Conoces un caso que falte, o uno colombiano que debamos cubrir a fondo? Escríbenos.