Man tries to argue case using AI avatar in New York court

In March 2023, a peculiar legal event took place in the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division's First Judicial Department. Jerome Dewald, a plaintiff involved in an employment dispute, presented his case not in person, but through an artificial intelligence-generated avatar displayed via video screen. The judges swiftly recognized that Dewald was attempting to argue his case through a fictional entity, leading to a confrontation with Justice Sallie Manzanet-Daniels, who expressed her displeasure at being misled. Dewald, lacking a law degree and legal representation, insisted the avatar was a tool he believed would assist him in presenting his arguments. Despite the unexpected twist, he proceeded to make his case after the avatar was turned off. Dewald's utilization of the AI avatar uncovered the blurred lines between technology and legal proceedings. This event highlighted that individuals without legal training might take liberties with emerging technologies, often without understanding the risks involved. A similar scenario occurred in June 2023 when two attorneys and a law firm faced penalties after using an AI tool for legal research, mistakenly citing non-existent legal cases due to AI hallucinations. Such incidents reveal a growing tension in the legal profession over the adoption of artificial intelligence, as missteps can lead to significant repercussions. Nevertheless, opposing the unusual introduction of technology in court, the Arizona Supreme Court has embraced AI, deploying avatars like 'Daniel' and 'Victoria' on its website to help summarize court rulings for public understanding. This duality illustrates the significant debate surrounding AI's role in law, prompting legal experts like Daniel Shin to suggest that the future of legal practice will increasingly be impacted by technology. Pro se litigants like Dewald may not receive adequate guidance on the use of synthetic media, emphasizing the need for clear directives in navigating legal environments enhanced by AI. As of early April 2025, Dewald's case had not yet been resolved, leaving questions about the legitimacy of technological intervention in legal presentations unanswered. While some jurisdictions are experimenting with AI to enhance public engagement with the justice system, the unexpected methods seen in Dewald's case reveal challenges that remain within the traditional legal framework. The legal system may need to evolve to address these challenges as AI becomes an increasingly common presence in courtrooms, balancing innovation and adherence to established legal norms.