Why “Artificial Intelligence” Is Not a Substitute for a Miami High-End Divorce Lawyer

In the past couple of years, the tech industry has dazzled investors and journalists with promises of “artificial intelligence” replacing all sorts of professional workers. Indeed, many people now turn to AI-based services for legal advice instead of going to an attorney. Unfortunately, relying on a chatbot to perform the same role as a qualified Miami high-end divorce attorney can prove costly, especially when the computer returns inaccurate information.

Self-Represented Divorce Litigant Chastised for Citing “Fake” Cases in Brief

The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal recently confronted a case where a self-represented litigant in a divorce case apparently tried to use an AI shortcut and failed. The underlying litigation, Goya v. Hayashida, involved a former husband’s appeal of a trial court’s rulings regarding the division of marital property. The Fourth District largely upheld the trial court’s decisions with one notable exception.

That exception had to do with a property in Peru. During the divorce trial, the husband and his sister both testified that their parents owned this property at one point, although they conflicted as to whether it was not owned by their parents or an aunt and uncle. In any event, there was no testimony or documentary evidence presented that the Peru property ever belonged to the former husband.

Despite this, the trial court determined that the Peru property was a “marital asset” and took that into account when making a final division of property. On appeal, the Fourth District held that this was a clear error. It would be one thing if the former wife presented some evidence to suggest the property belonged to her former husband. But in the absence of any such evidence, there was no basis for the trial court’s finding.

Separately, the Fourth District noted that the former wife, who represented herself on appeal without an attorney, filed an appellate brief that was “replete with and entirely supported by fake cases and legal propositions, presumably generated by artificial intelligence.” For instance, the former wife’s brief referenced two cases that simply did not exist. Nor were there any cases that supported the wife’s main contention, namely that Florida law required a party in a divorce claiming inherited property “must provide documents of transfer or other formal proof of inheritance.”

The Fourth District noted that, as a self-represented party, the former wife was still required to follow the same rules as attorneys. As such, the court had the authority to sanction her for failing to comply with Florida appellate rules. The Fourth District declined to do so, however, noting the former husband did not ask for sanctions, and the former wife “has not brought any other meritless or frivolous filings in this Court.”

Contact a Miami Family Law Attorney Today

When it comes to a divorce involving a complex division of marital assets, you should not try to handle the case yourself, or with the assistance of “artificial intelligence.” Instead, it is in your own best interest to work with an experienced and qualified family law attorney. Contact Hamilton O’Neill today to schedule a consultation.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14798638124085431869