[Editor’s Note: This article is to appear in Judicature, Vol. 107, No. 2, October 2023 (Forthcoming), published here with permission. The opinions and positions are those of the authors.]

Abstract -

Stories about Generative AI (“GenAI”) applications such as ChatGPT have dominated the news for much of 2023. Whether this technology is a blessing or a curse is still open to debate; what is not, however, is that GenAI is here to stay and that billions of dollars are pouring into the development of new applications. While panic spread through the educational community over fear that students would use GenAI to complete their assignments and examinations, there were also some mortifying and highly publicized misuses of GenAI in the legal profession, including attorneys filing pleadings citing fictitious legal authority which was the product of GenAI hallucinations. Concerns about the misuse of GenAI in their own courtrooms prompted several judges in North America to issue individual standing orders requiring disclosure of and certifications related to the use of GenAI specifically, or AI more generally, in connection with legal filings. While an understandable reaction, these orders have lacked consistency in what they cover or require, have been over-broad in scope, and have the potential to cause uncertainty and confusion within the bar, as well to chill legitimate uses of GenAI to increase access to the courts by self-represented litigants, and to reduce the costs and burdens associated with legal research and writing.