Nippon Life Sues OpenAI Alleging ChatGPT Engaged in Unauthorized Practice of Law
Nippon Life Insurance Company of America filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging that ChatGPT acted as an unlicensed attorney by advising a former disability claimant to reopen a settled case and drafting dozens of meritless motions. The insurer claims the AI's actions constitute unauthorized practice of law under Illinois statute and seeks $300,000 in compensatory damages. OpenAI has denied the allegations, calling the complaint meritless. The case is pending in federal court in Chicago.
- Company involved
- OpenAI
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
2 source articles · read the reporting →
Joel A. Rivera v. Triad Properties Corporation, et al. (N.D. Alabama): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Public Reprimand; Disqualification; Bar…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were presented to the court, affecting the defendants and the judicial process.
- Company involved
- Burrill Watkins LLC
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
Evans v. Robertson (4) (E.D. Michigan): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Briefs (both sides) struck
The AI system generated hallucinated legal citations in court filings, causing the court to strike the briefs of both plaintiff and defendant.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Shipt's new V2 algorithm reduces pay for 41% of workers, study finds
A study by MIT Media Lab and Coworker.org found that Shipt's new V2 payment algorithm reduced pay for 41% of workers by an average of 11% per shop. The algorithm, rolled out in September 2020, replaced a transparent payment system with a black-box model. Workers pooled data to analyze the impact, revealing uneven distribution of earnings.
- Company involved
- Shipt
- AI system involved
- V2
10 source articles · read the reporting →
Gittemeier v. Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance Company (E.D. Missouri): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Costs Order + Fine; One Attorney…
The AI system generated fictitious legal citations in a summary judgment motion, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Unnamed Brazilian litigant (): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Appeal partially granted (reintegration suspended, rent imposed), but
AI-generated fake court precedents were included in a legal appeal, leading to sanctions against the litigant for bad-faith litigation.
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
The People v. Raziel Ruiz Alvarez (CA California): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Published order; monetary sanction payable by Counsel…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were included in a court filing, affecting the defendant's legal representation and the court's resources.
- Company involved
- Attorney Siddell
1 source article · read the reporting →
Allstate's proposed retention model charged big spenders more in Maryland
Allstate proposed an auto insurance rate adjustment plan in Maryland using a retention model algorithm that varied premium changes based on existing premiums. The algorithm would have increased rates up to 20% for customers already paying the highest premiums while capping increases at 5% for others, and would have denied meaningful discounts to thousands owed reductions. The Maryland Insurance Administration rejected the plan as discriminatory, but Allstate claims it was withdrawn and has continued proposing similar models elsewhere. The proposal never took effect in Maryland.
- Company involved
- Allstate Corporation
- AI system involved
- retention model
9 source articles · read the reporting →
Landberg v City of New York (CA NY (2d)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction
AI-generated fake legal citations were included in a court filing, resulting in monetary sanctions against the attorney and his law firm.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Aguilar v. The Crawford Group, Inc. (D. Massachusetts): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Adverse Costs Order; Pro hac vice status…
The AI generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Lindemann Law Firm
1 source article · read the reporting →
Erin Booker v. The Kroger Co. (N.D. Georgia): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanctions; CLE
The court imposed monetary sanctions and continuing legal education requirements on plaintiff's counsel for using AI-generated fake legal authorities in a court filing.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Barteca Holdings v. Tacobarn (D. Connecticut): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; Bar Referral
The attorney filed a court document containing AI-hallucinated legal authorities, misleading the court and opposing party.
- Company involved
- Hilary Miller
1 source article · read the reporting →
Akerlund v. Atlas Air, Inc., et al. (11th Cir. CA): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
The system generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, potentially misleading the court and prejudicing the client's case.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Heriberto Perez-Castillo v. Todd W. Blanche (7th Cir. CA): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; Admonishment; Bar Referral
The AI generated false legal citations and quotations in an appellate brief, misleading the court and harming the client's immigration appeal.
1 source article · read the reporting →
TOV Realty, LLC v. Suarez; Kosel Equity, LLC v. MacGregor (SC Connecticut): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, 6 hours CLE;…
The AI generated legal briefs containing fabricated citations, which were submitted to the Connecticut Supreme Court.
- Company involved
- GLG Law LLC
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
UnitedHealthcare sued for using AI to deny Medicare Advantage patients care
A class action complaint alleges that UnitedHealthcare and its subsidiary naviHealth deployed an artificial intelligence model to override treating physicians' determinations of medically necessary care for elderly Medicare Advantage patients. The complaint claims the AI model has a known 90% error rate and wrongfully denied patients care. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, seeks damages on behalf of the estates of two deceased patients and all others similarly situated.
- Company involved
- UnitedHealthcare, Inc.
10 source articles · read the reporting →
Mazaheri v Law Society of Ontario (Law Society Tribunal (ON)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Adverse Costs Order
AI generated fabricated legal citations in a court filing by Shahryar Mazaheri.
1 source article · read the reporting →
In re Rosslyn2016, LLC, et al. (S.D. Texas (Bankruptcy)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, CLE on generative AI; Civil Contempt;…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were submitted to the bankruptcy court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
UnitedHealth used ALERT algorithm to limit mental health coverage, regulators found
ProPublica reports that UnitedHealth Group's Optum subsidiary used the ALERT algorithm to flag mental health patients and therapists as outliers, leading to therapy coverage denials. Regulators in California, Massachusetts and New York alleged this breached the federal Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, and UnitedHealth agreed to restrict the system in those jurisdictions. The company denies wrongdoing and says its programmes are compliant. Affected patients, including Medicaid enrollees, were left to pay out-of-pocket or go without care.
- Company involved
- UnitedHealth Group
- AI system involved
- ALERT
5 source articles · read the reporting →
Quinteros v. Harbor Distributing, LLC (CA California (1d)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; Bar referral
AI generated hallucinated legal citations that were filed in court, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Lipeles Law Group
1 source article · read the reporting →
JMOR Properties v. Artist Alley Townhomes et al. (CA Florida (4d)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were included in a court filing, affecting the court and the opposing party.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Reaves Law Firm, PLLC v. Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, et al. (W.D. Tennessee): AI-hallucinated content in court…
The AI generated fictitious legal authorities and arguments that were filed in a court motion, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Reaves Law Firm, PLLC
1 source article · read the reporting →
Southland Homes & Real Estate and Investment, LLC v. Lam (SC California): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanctions; Bar…
The AI system generated legal briefs containing fabricated case citations, which were filed in court, affecting the court and the opposing party.
1 source article · read the reporting →
ООО «Точка опоры» v. ООО «ЦСС» (West Siberian District AC): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Fine
The AI system generated fake legal citations that were submitted to the court, resulting in a fine for contempt.
- Company involved
- ООО «ЦСС»
1 source article · read the reporting →
