Skip to content

Tracked Changes, Tuesday, March 31, 2026

What changed in legal AI · · 1 min read

  1. Third Circuit reprimands a lawyer over unverified AI-generated authorities and warns of money sanctions next time

    In a precedential opinion filed March 27 in McCarthy v. DEA, the Third Circuit reprimanded attorney Daniel A. Pallen. His brief relied on AI-generated case summaries from a non-attorney; seven were inaccurate and one authority did not exist. He did not check them even after the government flagged the errors. The court said monetary sanctions were likely but for two mitigating factors, including that this was its first opportunity to address AI use.

    Source: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Read more: How to avoid AI-hallucinated citations in court filings, ABA Formal Opinion 512 explained: what the ABA says about lawyers using generative AI

  2. Survey finds 61.6% of responding federal judges use AI in their work, but only 5.4% use it daily

    Northwestern University researchers, working with the New York City Bar Association, surveyed 502 randomly selected federal judges in December 2025, and 112 responded. A preprint covered by LawSites on March 30 reports that 61.6% use at least one AI tool, 5.4% daily. Legal research was the top use, at 30%. Only 1.8% use AI to draft documents filed in cases.

    Source: LawSites · Read more: How many lawyers use AI? Legal AI adoption statistics, reconciled

  3. Court reporting company Steno raises a $49 million Series C led by Savano Capital Partners

    Steno announced a $49 million Series C on March 26, led by Savano Capital Partners, with First Round Capital and The Legal Tech Fund participating. Steno describes itself as a tech-enabled court reporting and litigation support company. It says the funding will support expansion and the next version of Transcript Genius, its AI transcript analysis tool, and that thousands of firms use Steno every month.

    Source: Steno, via LawSites