eviks 1 day ago

It's not "a little time"

4
blululu 1 day ago

The Judge spent the time to do exactly this. Judges are busy. Their time is valuable. The lawyer used AI to make the judge do work. The lawyer was too lazy to do the verification work that they expected the judge to perform. This speaks to a profound level of disrespect.

cbfrench 22 hours ago

I highly doubt the judge was tracking down citations or reading those cited cases herself to verify what was in them. They have law clerks for that. It doesn’t make it any less an egregious waste of the court’s time and resources, but I would be surprised if a district court judge is personally doing much, if any, of that sort of spadework.

victorbjorklund 19 hours ago

Checking if a case exists or not is little time in the context of legal research.

eviks 9 hours ago

Ok, now do this for every other mistake type mentioned in the article, and you've got yourself a case!

dwattttt 1 day ago

Perhaps not, but it is the time required to discharge their obligation under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (IANAL).

bombcar 1 day ago

It’s “paralegal time” which is nearly free …

dghlsakjg 21 hours ago

Courts are not allocated an unlimited budget for clerks.

Outside of the literal dollar cost, the opportunity cost here is further delays on the docket because the clerk was unable to do something else, and the court time that must now be spent dealing with the issue.

eviks 1 day ago

First, you're confusing time with money

Second, the mistakes weren't just incorrect citations any paralegal could check

rsynnott 1 day ago

> Second, the mistakes weren't just incorrect citations any paralegal could check

... Some of the 'mistakes' (strictly speaking they are not mistakes, of course) are _citations of cases which do not exist_.

eviks 1 day ago

... just ...