Advanced AI tools like ChatGPT can be incredible time-savers, but when they’re used to cut corners, they can exact a heavy toll.

This week, a New York federal judge blasted two attorneys who relied on ChatGPT to write a legal brief that cited fake cases. Judge P.Kevin Castel ordered attorneys Peter LoDuca, Steven Schwartz, and their law firm to pay $5,000 each for the mishap and to notify each judge they falsely identified as the author of a bogus ruling.

The judge wrote that “good lawyers appropriately obtain assistance from junior lawyers, law students, contract lawyers, legal encyclopedias and databases such as Westlaw and LexisNexis.” Instead, LoDuca and Schwartz used AI as a sloppy short – cut that wound up damaging their reputations and wallets. The judge further reprimanded them for not coming “clean” about their reliance on ChatGPT when their case citing was initially questioned.

While the size of these fines may not be significant, this case and the ridicule it sparked provides a cautionary tale.Tools like ChatGPT can be helpful, but they can’t – at least not yet – stand in for the hard work, due diligence, and time it takes for humans to ensure their work is accurate and reliable.