Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LetMyPeopleVote

LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
May 27, 2023

Trump and Ted Cruz mount last-minute appeals against Texas AG Paxton's GOP-led impeachment

Criminals protect their own.
https://twitter.com/TeaPainUSA/status/1662525077034770432
https://www.rawstory.com/ken-paxton-impeachment/

Both Trump and Cruz defended the long-indicted Paxton by pointing to his recent reelection and attacking his attackers. Both cited his opposition to Biden and MAGA credentials without addressing any of the allegations against him.

Trump posted this on Truth Social:

“The RINO Speaker of the House of Texas, Dade Phelan, who is barely a Republican at all and failed the test on voter integrity, wants to impeach one of the most hard working and effective Attorney Generals in the United States, Ken Paxton, who just won re-election with a large number of American Patriots strongly voting for him. You would think that any issue would have been fully adjudicated by the voters of Texas, especially when that vote was so conclusive.”

About an hour earlier, Cruz threw down for Paxton on Twitter as a victim of the Republican-controlled “swamp in Austin.”

“For the last nine years, Ken has been the strongest conservative AG in the country. Bar none. No attorney general has battled the abuses of the Biden admin more ferociously—and more effectively—than has Paxton. That’s why the swamp in Austin wants him out. The special interests don’t want a steadfast conservative AG. Virtually all of the information in the articles was public BEFORE Election Day, and the voters chose to re-elect Ken Paxton by a large margin.”
May 27, 2023

John Eastman's Expert in Disbarment Proceeding Disqualified

This makes me smile. Opinion evidence is not relevant to the issues in this proceeding
https://twitter.com/ElectionLawBlog/status/1662471591706370049
https://www.atthelectern.com/former-justice-brown-disqualified-as-expert-for-john-eastman/

Former Justice Brown disqualified as expert for John Eastman [Updated]
by David Ettinger
John Eastman, the attorney who faces possible disbarment by the California Supreme Court for his role in trying to overturn President Biden’s 2020 election, in March designated former California Supreme Court Justice — and former federal Court of Appeals Judge — Janice Rogers Brown as one of seven expert witnesses in the State Bar’s disciplinary proceedings against him. The Office of Chief Trial Counsel of the State Bar objected.

On Tuesday, a State Bar Court judge agreed with the OCTC.

In their expert witnesses designation, Eastman’s attorneys said that Brown was “expected to testify regarding her opinion that the California State Bar seems to be moving into unchartered [sic] territory with seeking to discipline an attorney on one side of a contentious legal fight.” The judge’s order says, “Judge Brown’s opinion regarding the unprecedented nature of OCTC pursuing charges against Respondent is not relevant to the court’s determination of Respondent’s culpability for violating the Rules of Professional Conduct or Business and Professions Code.”
May 27, 2023

Firm's legal malpractice insurance carrier on use of AI in the practice of law

I read all or most of the emails from our malpractice insurance carrier and found this discussion to be interesting. My first question is what lawyer would be stupid enough to use AI in their legal practice Here is part of the five page letter from the carrier

Loss Prevention Bulletin 23-02

OpenAI’s release of ChatGPT 3.5 for public use in late 2022 introduced the world to a powerful and transformative generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool with the ability to rapidly create new, seemingly human-crafted content in response to user prompts. ChatGPT, like other generative AI, is a “large language” model trained on vast amounts of data that then uses machine learning and sophisticated algorithms to predict the next best word in a response. The rise has been meteoric: in a mere two months after its launch, ChatGPT reached 100 million users—a milestone it took TikTok nine months to achieve and Instagram two and half years. In this same brief period, ChatGPT and newly introduced competing platforms such as Google’s Bard and Meta’s LLaMA (Large Language Model Meta AI) have also undergone exponential growth in responsiveness and accuracy.

The development of generative AI models designed specifically for use in the practice of law and trained on appropriately curated or proprietary data sets is potentially transformative, assisting lawyers in tasks such as contract review and management, due diligence, document review, research, and generating initial drafts of letters, contracts, briefs, and other legal documents. Indeed, global law firm Allen & Overy and Price Waterhouse Coopers both recently announced their use of an AI startup called Harvey, a chatbot built on ChatGPT 4.0 technology designed specifically for lawyers’ use in due diligence, regulatory compliance, and drafting contracts and client memos. Other legal service vendors, including LexisNexis and contract management platforms, have also introduced or announced the development of generative AI-based tools to aid lawyers’ practices.

Existing generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Microsoft’s Bing, Bard, and LLaMA, however, are not designed for law practice. In our view, lawyers should not use these general-purpose AI platforms for client work due to serious shortcomings in the reliability and accuracy of responses the tools generate, as well as the significant risk of potential exposure of confidential or proprietary client information.

I got this notice several weeks ago and last night I saw why the malpractice carrier was worried.
https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1662286888890138624
https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1662288292128104450
https://twitter.com/questauthority/status/1662273759259295746
I am a corporate/deal attorney and so the concept of using AI in a deal never occurred to me.

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 04:58 PM
Number of posts: 147,167
Latest Discussions»LetMyPeopleVote's Journal