Federal District Judge Sharion Aycock has sanctioned and disqualified all the lawyers on both sides of a case, including local counsel, for including hallucinated cites in pleadings and for not verifying them. It’s a well-reasoned and well supported 23-page Opinion containing many of the relevant opinions from other courts. It’s also a textbook on how not to act before a court. It should be required reading for all lawyers and legal professionals who are using or thinking of using AI.

I may well become the seminal case on these issues. Here’s my discussion of what happened and why for Above the Law.

Are midsize law firms in trouble? A recent Thomson Reuters Institute Report reveals some troubling findings.  As compared to other market segments, midsize expense growth is up, demand growth rate lower, investment in tech is less and less money is being spent on recruiting. That does not bode well if it continues. Here’s my thoughts for Above the Law.

The reality is that most lawyers’ clients are going to be using AI before and during the relationship. That means we as lawyers need to be knowledgable about AI and what it can and can’t do to protect our clients and generate and maintain their trust. Here’s some ideas in my Above the Law post, courtesy of some criminal lawyer friends.

Legal Geek 2026. A day packed with 10 minute presentations, roundtables, and workshops directed at trying to figure out where we are as a profession and what the impact of AI will ultimtely be. Here’s my summary of one fast paced day for Above the Law

Here’s my post for Above the Law on Gina Passarella’s (Centellic ’s Chief Content Officer), powerful 10 minute talk at LegalGeek 2026 on the state of the business of law. Her takeaways were that business people and in house counsel are going to be calling more shots, that there is an increase in competion for traditional law firms and that if these firms aren’t more careful and forward thinking, they may soon be running out of gas. More sophisticated in-house counsel are already not waiting on outside providers to make changes in light of the efficiencies AI and automation can provide.

Another law firm sued for a data breach. This time it’s not the firm’s clients but a class action brought by those who had no relationship with the firm other than their personally identifiable information was in the firm’s files and was exposed. The risks and disruption from cybersecurity lapses by law firms are real and growing. Here’s my discussion for Above the Law.

AI is changing the work collaberation that so essential to lawyers, particularly litigators. It’s time we quit relying on the water cooler training notion and moved to something more formal and deliberate. Here’s my thoughts for Above the Law.

Courts are starting to outright ban so-called smart glasses that can record audio and video from courtrooms. The impulse is understandable but how they are dealing with it could a problem.

The orders have definition problems. They ignore the broader wearable ecosystem: necklaces, AirPods with cameras, smartwatches, even mobile phones. And they miss an even bigger issue: what to do about glasses that can’t record but can feed AI-assisted information to lawyers and witnesses in real time.

Courts have tried this before. Remember when courts issued blanket AI bans on court filings that, read literally, would have prohibited Google and Grammarly?

The answer isn’t more bans. It’s education. An educated judge can ask the right questions, identify when lines are being crossed, and impose meaningful penalties. That’s a better investment of time and energy than knee-jerk orders.

My post for Above the Law.