"You quote the Pennsylvania Supreme Court from the Bayada case for a quote that does not exist in that case,"
"You cite the Popowsky case for a proposition and a quote that does not exist, and that case is not even on point to this case."
"I'm unhappy,"
"We pride ourselves in being aware of this issue and not including such things in our briefs. And so I apologize to the court to the extent that any of that's included."
"No one used AI to compile this brief."
Two Republican state House members and parents challenged the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission’s 2023 LGBTQ+ anti-discrimination protections for students. Attorneys Thomas W. King and Thomas E. Breth filed a 50-page brief in October citing prior cases to support the plaintiffs. Judge Matthew Wolf identified citations and quotes that were miscontextualized, later overruled, or nonexistent and questioned whether AI was used to prepare the brief. The judge said the filings put the court at a disadvantage. King apologized for any AI content and stated that no one at the firm used AI to compile the brief.
Read at LGBTQ Nation
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]