Nebraska — W. Gregory Lake: the most serious state-license case
This is currently the case I would regard as the most important precedent in the United States. W. Gregory "Greg" Lake — Nebraska What happened Lake represented a father in Prososki v. Regan, a…
This is currently the case I would regard as the most important precedent in the United States.
W. Gregory "Greg" Lake — Nebraska
What happened
Lake represented a father in Prososki v. Regan, a divorce/custody appeal before the Nebraska Supreme Court.
His brief contained an extraordinary 57 defective citations out of 63.
The problems included:
completely fictitious cases;
fictitious quotations;
real cases paired with fabricated holdings;
fabricated quotations from Nebraska statutes and court rules;
citations that bore the appearance of legitimate legal authorities but could not be verified.
The Nebraska Supreme Court struck the entire brief, dismissed the appeal and referred Lake to disciplinary authorities. The court emphasized that the lawyer's duties of competence, diligence and candor do not change because AI was used.
The particularly damaging development came afterward.
Lake initially denied using AI. He subsequently submitted an affidavit admitting that he had used generative AI to prepare the brief and described his failure to be forthcoming as a "grave error of judgment."
Discipline
The Nebraska Supreme Court subsequently temporarily suspended Lake from practicing law until further order.
That is substantially more serious than a Rule 11 fine or a federal-court reprimand.
But it is important not to overstate it: this is a temporary/interim suspension, not a final disbarment.
The subsequent disciplinary proceeding remains important because it could ultimately determine whether the suspension becomes a longer suspension—or potentially something more severe. The available reporting indicates the underlying disciplinary process was still pending.
Why Nebraska matters
This case establishes a potentially very important proposition:
A lawyer does not get to escape professional responsibility merely because the false authority was generated by AI.
The Nebraska Supreme Court treated the conduct under existing professional-responsibility rules rather than waiting for a special "AI rule."