Login
Powered by
MOMENTUM
MEDIA
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
The New York Supreme Court was left astonished last month when a man used an AI-generated avatar to stand in and argue his case.
As reported first by the Associated Press and The New York Times, on 26 March, Jerome Dewald – representing himself in an employment dispute – submitted an AI-generated avatar to argue his case before the First Judicial Department of the New York State Supreme Court’s Appellate Division.
Dewald had obtained court approval to submit a video to support his argument. However, he caught the judges off guard by failing to disclose that the video featured an AI-generated avatar delivering his oral argument.
As the video began to play, a cheerful, youthful-looking man in a button-down shirt and sweater appeared on the screen and addressed the panel of five judges, stating: “May it please the court. I came here today a humble pro se [sic] before a panel of five distinguished justices.”
Within moments of the video starting, the judges exchanged puzzled and bewildered glances to each other, causing Associate Justice Sallie Manzanet-Daniels of the New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court to interrupt the video, asking: “Is that counsel for the case?”
Dewald responded to the panel of judges, revealing that “I generated that. That’s not a real person.”
Justice Manzanet-Daniels, visibly disappointed, expressed her disapproval over this development, saying, “It would have been nice to know that when you made your application. You did not tell me that sir”, before sternly instructing that the video be shut off.
Despite the unexpected and disconcerting turn of events, the court allowed Dewald to continue presenting his argument in person.
Following the incident, The New York Times reported that Dewald issued an apology to the court and the presiding judges by issuing a written apology, clarifying: “My intention was never to deceive.”
“I was only seeking to present my arguments in the most efficient manner possible. However, I now realise that proper disclosure and transparency must always take precedence,” as stated in his apology, according to The New York Times.
In an interview with the Associated Press, Dewald revealed to them that he sought the court’s approval to present a prerecorded video, but ultimately chose to use a “product created by a San Francisco tech company to create the avatar”.
Initially, he attempted to generate a “digital replica that looked like him” but was unable to complete it before the scheduled court date.
We're evolving — and so should your insights. Heads up — Lawyers Weekly is going premium from 1 May for just $5 a month. Stay informed without missing a beat. More information coming soon.
Get breaking news
Grace Robbie
