Courts on AI / evidence
J.G. v. New York City Department of Education 2024-02-22 · 23 Civ. 959
No weight given Acknowledged AI output tendered chat-output offered by plaintiff challenge: weight sensitive matter — ruling only
Plaintiff’s counsel used GPT-4 as a cross-check for requested IDEA fee rates. Judge Engelmayer rejected the AI output as opaque and unreliable evidence of prevailing market rates, reduced the fee award, and warned against using ChatGPT to support legal fee petitions.
Rules cited: IDEA · 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3) · Lodestar method
The court's finding, in its words The court found the ChatGPT-4 submission utterly and unusually unpersuasive as support for prevailing market rates. Verbatim; United States court documents are public domain.
This decision in the coded corpus of US decisions on generative AI →
Decision damiencharlotin.com Read 2026-09-07 · primary document readFound via Damien Charlotin acknowledged-AI-output lead CSV (CC0) No alleged media is hosted or linked. Where the court found material genuine or fabricated, the finding is the court's; where a party merely alleged it, this page says so. Publication restrictions were checked on the read date. This record summarises a public court document or official publication and reports what it says; SafeLegalAI makes no findings of its own. Individuals and organisations are named only as they appear in that public record. Anyone named may send a right of reply, correction or contextual update (for example an appeal, vacatur or later disposition) via /report; we add a dated note where appropriate. Reply or correct this record .
compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial team method as of 2026-09-07 v0.1.1 coding CC BY 4.0 JSON
Disclaimer · Last checked 2026-09-07
SafeLegalAI is a research publication by Cognesio LLP, not a law firm. Nothing here is legal advice, and no lawyer–client relationship arises from reading it. Rules change; always check the official document linked on each record and take advice on your own situation.
Researched and drafted with AI assistance; verified against primary sources and edited by Cognesio LLP. The linked official documents are the record — our summaries are not the law and are not legal advice. Full disclaimer → · Something wrong? Report it →
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York · NY · United States · · 23 Civ. 959
Hugging Face