A woman in California has successfully used artificial intelligence tools, including ChatGPT, to overturn an eviction notice and avoid tens of thousands of dollars in penalties.
According to NBC News, Lynn White fell behind on rent and initially lost a jury trial after being served with an eviction notice. Instead of relying on a tenant advocacy network, she turned to ChatGPT and the AI search platform Perplexity for help in representing herself.
The decision to depend on AI for legal defence is usually considered unwise, but NBC reported that ChatGPT identified procedural errors made by the judge, advised White on what steps to take, and drafted legal responses.
“I can’t overemphasise the usefulness of AI in my case,” White told NBC. “I never, ever, ever, ever could have won this appeal without AI.”
She was among several individuals NBC interviewed who said they had used AI systems to handle their own legal matters. Another, Staci Dennett from New Mexico, used ChatGPT to negotiate a debt settlement for her home fitness business.
“I would tell ChatGPT to pretend it was a Harvard Law professor and to rip my arguments apart,” she said. “Rip it apart until I got an A-plus on the assignment.”
Her written submissions appeared so convincing that opposing lawyers reportedly told her by email that she could have a future in law.
But while some self-represented litigants have succeeded with AI support, many others have faced serious problems. Chatbots are known to generate fabricated legal citations and inaccurate advice.
In one case cited by NBC, energy drink executive Jack Owoc was sanctioned in August after filing a motion containing made-up references produced by AI. He was ordered to complete ten hours of community service.
Several lawyers have also faced penalties for submitting AI-generated material in court. Earlier this week, 404 Media reported that a New York lawyer who used AI to draft a filing later relied on the same tool to write his explanation for doing so.
“This case adds yet another unfortunate chapter to the story of artificial intelligence misuse in the legal profession,” the presiding judge wrote.
In a separate incident, a California lawyer was fined $10,000 in August after submitting an appeal largely written by AI. Twenty-one of the 23 cited cases were found to be fictitious.
Legal professionals have warned that easy access to AI tools is leading more people to represent themselves. “I’ve seen more self-represented litigants in the past year than probably in my entire career,” said paralegal Meagan Holmes from the law firm Thorpe Shwer.
Technology companies also caution against relying on AI for legal decisions. xAI, a firm owned by Elon Musk, explicitly warns users not to use its systems for “high-stakes automated decisions that affect a person’s safety, legal or material rights.”
Despite such warnings, tools like ChatGPT continue to offer detailed legal responses to user queries.
“I can understand how someone without a lawyer, and without the means to hire one, might be tempted to rely on these tools,” attorney Robert Freund told NBC. “What I can’t understand is an attorney making arguments based on complete fabrication.”