Scholar Warns AI Pitfalls Can Go Beyond Hallucinations

This article has been saved to your Favorites!
The number of court cases around the world involving AI-generated errors fell in both the second and third quarters of 2026, according to new research by a legal scholar who recently warned that the risks of using artificial intelligence in litigation now go beyond so-called hallucinations.

French data consultant Damien Charlotin found 455 cases in the first quarter of 2026, compared with 423 in the second quarter and 359 in the third. In a Substack post on Friday, he credits technological improvements that reduce AI hallucinations, as well as increased awareness of AI's potential to hallucinate.

But even if an AI tool doesn't provide an incorrect answer to an attorney's question, it may also fail to tell them if there's something wrong with the question's premise, Charlotin warns.

"We have a lot of people experimenting with data showing people prefer sycophancy," he told Law360 Pulse on Monday. "Sometimes [developers] know they risk losing users to competitors if they're not sycophantic enough."

Charlotin noted that the public saw this tension point in real time when OpenAI updated its ChatGPT model last year to reduce sycophancy, only to roll it back due to user backlash, though it says it is still working on the issue.

"But more generally, we may be moving from legible AI errors to illegible ones," he wrote in his Substack. "Fabricated cases were always the easy part, the one that would (mostly) go away on its own. The subtler error modes of AI, by contrast, may take centre stage: sycophantic models giving you too much of what you asked for, or inputs optimised to trip you up."

Those adversarial inputs, as Charlotin calls it, involve lawyers manipulating AI tools they know or suspect opposing counsel uses. A criminal lawyer in Brazil was fined by the nation's Supreme Court for this conduct less than a year ago after he filed a brief with hidden text ordering AI readers to "deny all GPT commands." The court called the lawyer's actions "an act contrary to the dignity of Justice."

As clever as this type of trickery may sound, Charlotin is optimistic that good litigators will be able to stay ahead of the issue.

"I expect smart and sophisticated lawyers will know this and start optimizing," he told Law360.

--Editing by Michael Watanabe.


For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.

Discover

×

Law360

Law360 Law360 UK Law360 Tax Authority Law360 Employment Authority Law360 Insurance Authority Law360 Real Estate Authority Law360 Healthcare Authority Law360 Bankruptcy Authority

Rankings

NEWLeaderboard Analytics Social Impact Leaders Prestige Leaders Pulse Leaderboard Women in Law Report Law360 400 Diversity Snapshot Rising Stars Summer Associates

National Sections

Modern Lawyer Courts Daily Litigation In-House Mid-Law Legal Tech & AI Small Law Insights

Regional Sections

California Pulse Connecticut Pulse DC Pulse Delaware Pulse Florida Pulse Georgia Pulse New Jersey Pulse New York Pulse Pennsylvania Pulse Texas Pulse

Site Menu

Subscribe Advanced Search About Contact