From the classroom to the courtroom, artificial intelligence is changing the legal profession.
“We can’t ignore it. It has to be embraced. We have to learn how to use it and understand it and evolve along with it,” said Nick Allard, dean of the Jacksonville University College of Law.
At JU, AI is integrated into the entire curriculum instead of being taught as a stand-alone course. Allard said students focus on practical training and experience, technical competence, continuing AI education and ethics and professionalism.
Allard said that while AI can be an asset to the legal system and make services more affordable for consumers, the new technology also creates issues that society must address. Those include rules and regulations about how the technology can be employed and what happens when those rules aren’t followed.
“That’s where lawyers come in,” he said. “AI will keep lawyers busy for decades.”
In Florida, the work of addressing ethics and professionalism surrounding AI has already begun.
In response to the increasing use of AI in the practice of law, the Supreme Court of Florida has amended the Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration to require the signer of any document filed with the state’s courts to represent that “the legal authorities identified exist and are accurately cited.”
The new rules take effect June 15.
The court said it adopted the amendments “principally to create a statewide, uniform replacement for varied circuit court administrative orders imposing disclosure and certification requirements about the use of artificial intelligence in filings.”
Generative AI tools, including large language models and other systems that produce text or citations in response to prompts, are being used as drafting or research aids for court filings.
The court said it recognizes AI can be helpful, but the technology can generate content that appears plausible but is inaccurate, including fabricated or “hallucinated” information.
The amendment authorizes courts to impose penalties for any filing inconsistent with the representation a signer makes. Sanctions may include “reprimand, contempt, striking of the document, dismissal of proceedings, costs, attorneys’ fees or other sanctions.”
The requirement applies to filings prepared by licensed attorneys and to filings prepared by people representing themselves before the court.