Litigation Trending: Judge in Alabama uses AI to assist in determining the meaning of a contractual term
05 July 2024
05 July 2024
On 28 May 2024, Judge Kevin Newsom of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit handed down a judgment which has gained a lot of attention (Snell v. United Specialty Insurance Company, 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 22-12581). As far as we are aware it is the first time on record that a Judge in the United States has relied on a Large Language Model (LLM) to determine the "ordinary meaning" of a contractual term.
Although unprecedented (and with the potential to appear gimmicky), Judge Newsom's use of the technology available to him was careful and reasoned. This judgment gives a helpful indication of how AI might be used effectively in the context of a case involving the interpretation of contracts.
While some lawyers and judges may be unwilling to trust any aspect of their practice to AI, others are developing their confidence in the use of this technology as part of their day-to-day practice.
The case concerned the interpretation of an insurance contract. Was the claimant covered by his insurer for claims made, or not? He asserted that the "ordinary meaning rule" is the most fundamental semantic rule of interpretation. In that context, Judge Newsom sought to determine whether the installation of an in-ground trampoline should be considered to fall within the ordinary meaning of "landscaping".
According to his judgment, Judge Newsom asked the LLM ChatGPT 'what is the ordinary meaning of landscaping?'. The response was: '“Landscaping” refers to the process of altering the visible features of an area of land, typically a yard, garden or outdoor space, for aesthetic or practical purposes. This can include activities such as planting trees, shrubs, flowers, or grass, as well as installing paths, fences, water features, and other elements to enhance the appearance and functionality of the outdoor space.' Seeking further clarification, the Judge asked whether the specific act of installing an in-ground trampoline was "landscaping", to which ChatGPT responded, 'yes' and then provided further commentary. This process was repeated on Google Bard, which provided a very similar response.
Judge Newsom explained that, initially, he had carried out more traditional research to define the term using dictionaries but was left feeling 'frustrated and stuck'. The Judge explained this 'ultimately led [him]—initially half-jokingly, later more seriously—to wonder whether ChatGPT and other AI-powered large language models (“LLMs”) might provide a helping hand'.
Judge Newsom highlighted the following advantages and disadvantages of relying on LLMs to define the ordinary meaning of terms.
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
Many English judges may feel uncomfortable following Judge Newsom's novel approach to contractual interpretation. However, others may feel more inclined to "give it a go", particularly given the recent comments of senior judiciary who have advocated for the adoption of AI by the courts. Last year, we reported on Sir Geoffrey Vos' lecture to commercial litigators in which he discussed embracing the use of AI to resolve disputes. Court of Appeal judge Lord Justice Birss has praised the "real potential" of LLMs and has spoken about his own use of AI to draft parts of a judgment.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to.
Readers should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.