Toronto Lawyer Confronts Unprecedented Legal Challenges Over AI Use in Court
In what appears to be a landmark case for Ontario's legal system, a Toronto lawyer is facing serious professional and legal consequences for her alleged reliance on artificial intelligence to prepare court submissions. Mary Hyun-Sook Lee, also known as Jisuh Lee, is currently navigating both a misconduct proceeding initiated by the Law Society Tribunal and a criminal contempt of court hearing. The central allegation revolves around her purported use of ChatGPT to draft legal documents, which subsequently contained references to non-existent case law.
The Initial Discovery and Judicial Response
The controversy emerged during an estates case before Justice Fred Myers of the Ontario Superior Court. The experienced lawyer, with three decades of practice, presented written materials that raised immediate concerns. Justice Myers discovered that hyperlinks within her submissions either led to completely non-functional destinations or referenced legal decisions entirely unrelated to the matter at hand. This prompted the judge to suspect that an unreliable artificial intelligence program might be responsible for generating these problematic citations.
Justice Myers expressed significant concern about the implications of such practices, stating clearly that "a court decision based on fake laws would represent an outrageous miscarriage of justice" and would severely damage public confidence in the judicial system. He initially ordered Lee to demonstrate why she should not be held in contempt for presenting these questionable materials.
Evolving Narrative and Additional Allegations
In her initial response to the court, Lee attributed the problematic filings to a student in her office who had supposedly used ChatGPT without proper supervision. She expressed shock at the discovery and offered apologies while committing to undertake six hours of professional education regarding artificial intelligence risks in legal practice. Justice Myers showed some leniency at this stage, noting that the widespread publicity surrounding the case had already served as a deterrent to similar conduct within the legal profession.
However, the situation took a more serious turn several months later when Lee submitted a letter to the court retracting her earlier explanation. In this subsequent communication, she admitted that she personally had used ChatGPT to assist with drafting the document, including conducting preliminary legal research and composition. She confessed to failing to verify citations independently, which resulted in the inclusion of fabricated case law. Furthermore, Lee acknowledged that her initial claim about staff involvement was deliberately misleading, motivated by fear of consequences and personal embarrassment.
Compounding Legal Troubles and Professional Implications
Justice Myers responded to this revelation by ordering Lee to return to court to address why she should not be held in contempt on two distinct grounds: first for using artificial intelligence to generate court submissions containing false information, and second for subsequently providing misleading statements to the court about her actions. During a December case conference, Lee argued that her sincere apology and implementation of an office AI policy should resolve the matter, but the judge maintained that the case presented unusual circumstances requiring further examination.
The legal professional now faces multiple challenges simultaneously. In addition to the contempt proceedings, the Law Society Tribunal has formally initiated conduct proceedings against her. Justice Myers has characterized this situation as particularly unusual, noting that he has "not encountered any case law where a lawyer admits to deliberately misleading a court in a criminal contempt proceeding about themselves." He suggested that this case could have reverberating effects throughout the justice system as legal professionals grapple with appropriate boundaries for artificial intelligence use in legal practice.
Lee has since retained legal representation, and her contempt hearing is scheduled for later this spring. She was unavailable for comment regarding these ongoing proceedings. This case emerges as Canadian legal institutions increasingly confront questions about ethical artificial intelligence implementation, professional responsibility, and maintaining integrity within judicial processes as technology becomes more integrated into legal workflows.
