Judges in one of the nation\u2019s largest court systems have started using artificial intelligence, testing a tool that can rapidly distill hundreds of pages of legal motions and use samples of a jurist\u2019s writing style to help reach conclusions and even draft tentative rulings.<\/p>\n
The program, which launched last month, gave half a dozen Los Angeles County civil court judges access to AI software called Learned Hand. Although it could prove critical in a shorthanded court system that is facing a workload crisis <\/a>on many fronts, the announcement has also drawn concern from some members of the county\u2019s legal community who fear the technology could create errors and erode public trust in the legal system.<\/p>\n Court officials say judges in the pilot program are \u201crequired to review and edit the draft before adopting tentative rulings\u201d generated by Learned Hand, and they touted the new effort to use technology to assist with basic judicial tasks and clear case backlogs.<\/p>\n \u201cJudicial officers have long been supported by research attorneys and law clerks who assist with summarization, legal research, analysis and drafting assistance,\u201d said Rob Oftring Jr., the court\u2019s chief spokesman. \u201cThis assistance does not supplant the judicial officer\u2019s independent role in decision-making.\u201d<\/p>\n Shlomo Klapper, chief executive and founder of the company behind Learned Hand, said it is already being used by court systems in 10 states. The Michigan Supreme Court began using the software last summer to review applications for permission to appeal in civil and criminal cases, according to a spokesman for the court. <\/p>\n Klapper described the AI tool as a co-intelligence, akin to a \u201cjudicial sous chef,\u201d that will support members of the bench without supplanting them.<\/p>\n Klapper, who worked as an attorney and federal law clerk before starting Learned Hand in 2024, said it\u2019s a necessary aid for a judiciary drowning in a \u201cpaper blizzard,\u201d especially with public access to AI models such as ChatGPT leading to more self-represented litigants filing cases in civil court.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is what\u2019s giving me such urgency. We need to build the right tools so courts are equipped to deal with this tsunami,\u201d he said. \u201cThe system is drowning and the flood hasn\u2019t even started.\u201d<\/p>\n Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman expressed some concern with the county\u2019s plan. He said AI could be useful in cutting down the time judges spend on repetitive tasks such as assessing motions for summary judgment in civil court, which often cite the same case law and paragraphs over and over again. But he described the use of AI to generate rulings as \u201cproblematic.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cEven when a judicial assistant or a law clerk comes up with a tentative on which position the judge should take, before the judge has taken their own position, that greatly influences what the judge\u2019s position should be,\u201d Hochman said, warning the AI-generated tentative ruling could predispose a judge before they conduct a legal analysis.<\/p>\n Acknowledging growing public anxiety about the integration of AI into different facets of society, Klapper turned to pop culture to assuage fears. He said he\u2019s not building Skynet \u2014 the artificial intelligence that brings about the end of days in the \u201cTerminator\u201d films \u2014 but something similar to Jarvis, Iron Man\u2019s affable computer assistant.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t come from a disruptive mindset. \u2026 I\u2019m here to build,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n AI has caused incidents in the legal system that critics say justify concern. Last year, a Los Angeles attorney was fined for submitting a filing full of legal citations that were hallucinated by ChatGPT. <\/a>Last month, a federal prosecutor in North Carolina resigned after submitting a filing that was almost wholly produced by the same artificial intelligence. <\/p>\n