The judge scolded the lawyers for doubling down on their fake citations.

  • Fubarberry@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Even if you thought it was just a search engine, it’s hard to imagine citing a case without independently validating it first.

    • wjrii@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Here’s the thing, even if you had zero intention of actually reading a case, there are STILL next steps once you get a cite. There is an entire “skill” you’re taught in law school called Shepardizing (based on an older set of books that helped with this task) where you have to see if your case has been treated as binding precedent, had distinctions drawn to limit its applicability, or was maybe even overturned. Back when I was learning, the online citators would put up handy-dandy green, yellow, and red icons next to a case, and even the laziest law student would at least make sure everything was green before moving on in a Shepardizing quiz without looking deeper. And even THAT was just for a 1-credit legal research class.

      These guys were lazy, cheap (they used “Fast Case” initially when they thought they had a chance in state court; it’s a third-rate database that you get for free from your state bar and is indeed often limited to state law), and stupid. They didn’t even commit malpractice with due diligence. I can only assume that they were “playing out the string” and extracting money from their client until the Federal case was dismissed with prejudice, but they played stupid games and won stupid prizes.