Alabama pays millions to private attorneys to defend them from some of their alleged bad deeds—but now, that defense has gone spectacularly wrong. A federal judge is considering sanctions against the law firm representing Alabama after one of its attorneys used AI to cut corners in court.
Crises Create Contracts
In 2018, Alabama's men's prisons were cited for having the nation's highest homicide rate. By 2019, at least 14 inmates in these facilities had been killed by others. Against this backdrop of ongoing prison issues, attorney Bill Lunsford of Butler Snow saw a business opportunity. Although state governments have their own attorneys, they often hire law firms when they need specialized expertise or additional legal resources. States typically retain law firms through competitive bidding processes or direct appointments by attorneys general or agency heads. These arrangements may involve fixed fees, hourly rates, or contingency agreements, depending on the nature of the legal matter and state procurement regulations.
After Butler Snow negotiated deals with the state of Alabama, it soon began accumulating significant fees defending the Alabama Department of Corrections (ADOC). In June 2023, Lunsford's firm was awarded approximately $7.68 million. This was quickly followed by an additional $14.9 million awarded in July 2023 through amended contracts, continuing his firm's representation of the state. Last December, the state approved three more contracts for Lunsford, totaling $4.8 million. State representative Chris England, who was on the committee that awarded Butler Snow the contracts, said “[w]e are just used to it by now” and that Lunsford is basically “a state agency.”
As a part of all those big contracts, Butler Snow was to represent ADOC in a complicated lawsuit with the U.S. Department of Justice that alleged the widespread physical and sexual violence within the state's prisons.
Inmate Frankie Johnson was attacked and stabbed at an Alabama prison. He filed a lawsuit against the state, alleging corrections officers failed to protect him. Bill Lunsford and Matthew Reeves, a partner at Butler Snow and a leader in the firm's litigation group, represented the state.
Hallucinated Cases
The Butler Snow attorneys filed documents for the state in the lawsuit, including a motion to compel Johnson's testimony. The motion included legal citations, which is typical. But there was something very atypical about these particular citations, which Johnson’s attorneys spotted.
They pointed out that the motion "appears to have wholly invented case citations, possibly through the use of generative artificial intelligence." They identified five "hallucinated" citations across two documents, including misdated cases and non-existent ones. Further review by Johnson's attorneys found more fabricated citations in other firm documents.
Then, last month, U.S. District Court Judge Anna M. Manasco held a hearing to resolve this issue. She expressed concern that previous AI-related sanctions nationwide have been insufficient and stated she will consider a "fuller range" of consequences. She asked the Butler Snow attorneys why she shouldn’t sanction them. Did they have anything to say?
Remorseful Reeves
Well, all they could really say was “sorry.” Reeves apologized, admitting he used AI (including Westlaw Precision with CoCounsel and ChatGPT) for research and to obtain citations, failing to verify them and violating firm policy.
Several attorneys from Butler Snow LLP were involved in drafting legal motions that contained inaccurate citations. The initial draft of the motion to depose incarcerated persons was prepared by attorney William J. Cranford, who sent it to co-counsel Reeves for review. Reeves then used ChatGPT to find legal references for the motion without checking their accuracy. These citations turned out to be incorrect or nonexistent "hallucinations." After revising the draft, Cranford finalized and filed it without knowing about the false citations (or Reeves's use of AI tools).
Reeves didn’t realize these citations were made up. Although he had no intention of misleading anyone, he admitted that he should’ve verified the citations. Butler Snow had allegedly warned its attorneys about using AI tools like ChatGPT for research since 2023 and emphasized verifying all citations' accuracy before submission to courts. Apparently, though, the incident wasn’t a one-off for Reeves; a similar situation occurred with another motion where Cranford drafted it and Reeves inserted incorrect citations using ChatGPT. Reeves took sole responsibility in his response to the court.
A Slap on the Wrist?
Judge Manasco has given Butler Snow 10 days to review its AI policies before she decides on potential sanctions, which could range from continuing education to bar referrals or temporary suspensions. Following the incident, the firm reminded its team again about ethical duties. It claims that it’s planning new training sessions on proper AI usage in legal work along with updated protocols for reviewing documents before filing them with courts.
If you were the state of Alabama, you might be a little skeptical of Butler Snow. But apparently, the Alabama Attorney General’s Office isn’t all that concerned. A lawyer from their office said that “Mr. Lunsford remains the attorney general’s counsel of choice.” Let’s hope they’ve learned their lesson.
Related Resources:
- A Mental Health Check-In for the Legal Profession (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
- Haven't Started Using AI Yet? You Aren't as Behind as You Might Think. (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
- An AI Ghost Speaks to the Man Who Killed Him at Sentencing (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
