top of page
newbits.ai logo – your guide to AI Solutions with user reviews, collaboration at AI Hub, and AI Ed learning with the 'From Bits to Breakthroughs' podcast series for all levels.

👉 Subscribe to NewBits Digest

⚖️ AI Avatar Courtroom Case Stuns Judges in New York

Updated: Apr 10


NewBits Digest feature covering the controversial use of an AI avatar in a New York courtroom—spotlighting the legal system’s growing challenges with artificial intelligence and digital representation.

In a moment that feels more like science fiction than legal reality, the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division recently encountered its first AI avatar courtroom incident.


On March 26, Jerome Dewald, a self-represented plaintiff in an employment appeal, submitted a video in lieu of a live argument. But when the justices pressed play, they were met not by Dewald, but by a smiling AI-generated avatar who opened with the traditional greeting, “May it please the court…”


The problem? That man didn’t exist.


Justice Sallie Manzanet-Daniels immediately paused the video and asked who was speaking. Dewald admitted the video featured a digital stand-in created with an AI avatar tool — not a licensed attorney, not even a real person.


“I don’t appreciate being misled,” Manzanet-Daniels said, clearly irritated.

While the court allowed the argument to continue, the justices expressed strong disapproval over the lack of disclosure. Dewald later explained that he used the avatar because he was nervous about stumbling or mumbling on video. Though he had permission to submit a video argument, he hadn’t clarified that the video would feature a digital persona.


“The court was really upset about it. They chewed me up pretty good,” Dewald told the Associated Press.

🧠 AI Avatar Courtroom Incident Adds to Legal AI Controversies


This AI avatar courtroom episode adds to a growing list of clashes between the legal system and generative AI:


  • In 2023, two New York attorneys were fined $5,000 for submitting fake case law generated by ChatGPT.

  • Michael Cohen’s legal team accidentally filed documents with fabricated rulings, also due to reliance on AI.

  • Meanwhile, the Arizona Supreme Court recently launched official digital avatars named “Daniel” and “Victoria” to explain legal rulings to the public — not to argue cases.


Legal tech researcher Daniel Shin of William & Mary Law School said Dewald’s move didn’t surprise him.


“It was inevitable,” he said. “Pro se litigants often operate without clear guidance or knowledge of courtroom norms. AI makes it easier — but also riskier — to navigate that space.”

As of now, Dewald’s appeal remains under review.


🔍 Should AI Avatar Courtroom Appearances Be Allowed?


The broader question is now front and center:


Do AI avatars have any legitimate place in the courtroom — for accessibility or efficiency — or do they threaten legal integrity?


While courts may find value in AI-driven explanations and outreach tools, using avatars to speak on behalf of litigants or attorneys, especially without disclosure, raises serious concerns.


Let us know your take.



Enjoyed this article?


Stay ahead of the curve by subscribing to NewBits Digest, our weekly newsletter featuring curated AI stories, insights, and original content—from foundational concepts to the bleeding edge.


👉 Register or Login at newbits.ai to like, comment, and join the conversation.


Want to explore more?


  • AI Solutions Directory: Discover AI models, tools & platforms.

  • AI Ed: Learn through our podcast series, From Bits to Breakthroughs.

  • AI Hub: Engage across our community and social platforms.


Follow us for daily drops, videos, and updates:


And remember, “It’s all about the bits…especially the new bits.”


Comments

bottom of page