Additionally, fellow attorney Peter Loduca, in an affidavit, supported Schwartz’s research and claimed he had no reason to doubt its sincerity or any involvement in the research process.
On April 25, Schwartz was ordered to show cause as to why he should not be sanctioned for using a false and fraudulent notarization in an affidavit.
In a subsequent affidavit filed on Wednesday, Schwartz provided screenshots of his conversation with ChatGPT, attempting to confirm the authenticity of the cases.
Despite asking ChatGPT if “Varghese” was a real case, to which the chatbot affirmed it was. Schwartz later inquired about the source, and ChatGPT again maintained that the false case was genuine.
The chatbot apologized for any confusion and later stated that the case could be found on legal research databases such as Westlaw and LexisNexis.
When Schwartz sought assurance that the other cited cases were also real, ChatGPT reassured him that they were genuine. And could be verified on reputable legal databases.
