[asmithmd1]

Of course I do not know, but he should have come clean. "Hey, I can't find this case in WestLaw, but chatGPT found it and produced it". Instead he just submitted it as-is right out of chatGPT. Alarm bells had to be going off in his mind that a federal court decision in a lawsuit was less than 5 pages

[Vespasian]

Forward thinking for him to try out ChatGPT for his work. Nothing wrong with experimenting with a potential helpful tool.

But just as I review and correct code snippets it produces, he should have verified the results because nothing indicated to him that they are any good (besides the fact that they were well written).

I'm pretty sure plenty of other lawyers are experimenting with ways to use ChatGPT without being quite as naive.

This is 100% on this guys uncritical thinking.