A federal court in Texas has sanctioned an attorney for using artificial intelligence tools in a way that compromised his legal filings, drawing renewed attention to the risks of unvetted AI in the legal profession. Brandon Monk, a Beaumont-based lawyer, was fined $2,000 and ordered to attend a class on the ethical use of AI after submitting court documents with fabricated case citations.
The ruling by District Judge Marcia Crone highlights a growing challenge in the legal industry: how to balance the efficiency of generative AI tools with the need for accuracy and professional accountability. The case also underscores larger trends revealed in a recent Integris survey, which found that clients are increasingly scrutinizing how law firms use technology and how those practices impact trust, confidentiality, and service quality.
The Monk Case: A Cautionary Tale
Monk’s trouble began in a wrongful termination lawsuit against Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. While opposing counsel reviewed Monk’s response to a motion for summary judgment, they discovered citations to two nonexistent cases and quotations that could not be verified. The errors, Judge Crone noted in her ruling, stemmed from Monk’s reliance on an AI tool to draft the filing without verifying its output.
“Monk submitted the response without reading the cases cited or even confirming the existence or validity of the cases,” Judge Crone wrote. “After [opposing counsel] identified the nonexistent legal authorities contained in the response, Monk took no action to verify his research or address these issues.”
Monk admitted he had used a generative AI tool for legal drafting, relying on its internal verification feature, which failed to catch the fabricated citations. The resulting legal battle not only embarrassed Monk but also imposed over $7,500 in additional legal fees on Goodyear’s defense team. These costs, Judge Crone ruled, could have been avoided with basic due diligence.
A Widespread Issue in the Legal Industry
Monk’s case is the latest in a string of incidents involving AI-generated legal documents. In 2023, a New York lawyer faced disciplinary action after using ChatGPT to draft a filing with fictitious citations. Former Trump attorney Michael Cohen has also been accused of submitting AI-generated filings with inaccuracies.
Such cases have prompted courts to adopt stricter rules on AI usage. In addition to federal requirements under Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure—which mandate that lawyers verify their filings’ accuracy—many jurisdictions, including the Eastern District of Texas, have enacted local rules requiring lawyers to ensure AI-generated content adheres to ethical and professional standards.
Client Concerns Highlighted in the Integris Survey
While AI missteps make headlines, the broader concern for law firms lies in how these incidents erode client trust. The 2025 Integris report, which surveyed 750 U.S. law firm clients, revealed that clients are increasingly wary of their attorneys’ use of technology, particularly generative AI tools.
Key Findings:
- 67% of clients expressed hesitation to work with firms that rely on outdated or unproven technology.
- 70% of respondents said they were concerned about firms using AI tools like ChatGPT, particularly in ways that might compromise accuracy or confidentiality.
- 52% of clients reported concerns about cybersecurity, with 8% having experienced a breach involving their legal representation.
- 40% of clients said they would pay a premium for firms that demonstrate robust cybersecurity practices, while 37% would switch firms if they discovered outdated or insecure technology was in use.
Integris Vice President Greg Cooke said the findings reflect a fundamental shift in how clients evaluate their legal representation. “Clients expect security to be built in, not bolted on,” Cooke said. “They want firms that embrace modern technology … as a fundamental part of their service.”
The Costs of Falling Behind
The Integris survey identified a stark reality for law firms that fail to modernize: the hidden costs of neglect. Firms risk not only sanctions and reputational damage but also lost revenue opportunities.
Risks for Law Firms:
- Client Attrition: Nearly half of surveyed clients said they would leave firms that fail to prioritize cybersecurity or technology updates.
- Lost Revenue: Thirty-seven percent of clients are willing to pay more for firms that demonstrate strong digital trust, presenting a significant competitive advantage for firms that invest in IT.
- Reputational Damage: Data breaches and delays caused by outdated technology were cited as major red flags that could lead to negative word-of-mouth among clients.
“Law firms face a new reality: digital trust is as crucial as legal expertise,” said Cooke. “Our findings show that clients not only want security and efficiency—they’re willing to pay for it. Firms that fail to prioritize cybersecurity and technology modernization risk losing clients and revenue.”
How Firms Can Rebuild Trust
Monk’s case underscores the urgency for law firms to implement comprehensive policies around AI use and cybersecurity. The Integris report suggests several actionable steps for firms looking to regain client trust:
- Verify AI Outputs: Attorneys should always review AI-generated content for accuracy and ensure it aligns with professional standards before submission.
- Adopt Secure Communication Tools: With 69% of clients preferring secure portals for document sharing, firms must move beyond email to protect sensitive information.
- Embrace Transparency: Firms should disclose their AI usage policies and emphasize human oversight to reassure clients about the quality and confidentiality of their services.
- Invest in IT Infrastructure: Upgrading to modern technology not only improves internal efficiency but also meets client expectations for speed and security.
Digital Trust: A Competitive Advantage
For law firms, the stakes are clear: Technology is no longer a back-office concern—it’s a front-line differentiator. Firms that embrace secure, modern technology can turn client trust into a competitive advantage.
The Monk case and the findings from the Integris survey are reminders that trust, once lost, is hard to regain. But for firms willing to adapt, the path forward is filled with opportunity. By making technology investment a priority, law firms can not only protect their clients but also position themselves as leaders in a rapidly evolving market.
The message from clients is simple: Prove your commitment to digital trust, or risk being left behind.
