#Westlaw
LightNews LightNews
asphyxeno.bsky.social
is he trying to set a world record for how many times someone can shove their own foot in their mouth in a single hearing?? if so we should contact Guinness

sorry your honor westlaw only works for other people's documents
February 6, 2026 at 6:42 PM
popelizbet.bsky.social
Things used to be easier. A lot of older lawyers are not keeping up enough to do competent work, this "but I didn't have access to Westlaw" was the excuse in the first of these cases to get reported on.
February 6, 2026 at 5:51 PM
charizardlotte.bsky.social
lol listen there are days where I wish I could go back to my pre westlaw life
February 6, 2026 at 5:51 PM
lindaholmes.bsky.social
There is a whole undercurrent that I suspect amounts to “I could not afford a Westlaw subscription, so I tried to get by without it, which makes things go much more slowly, but of course that was too slow so I just kind of did whatever.”
February 6, 2026 at 4:38 PM
fquin.bsky.social
I hope his malpractice insurance is up to date. This is the part that got me. He didn’t use Lexis or Westlaw because he “didn’t have time.” Sir!
Excerpt from a hearing concerning an attorney’s use of AI in their legal submissions.
February 6, 2026 at 4:36 PM
camerondotca.bsky.social
So, not lawyer here, one assumes that one either has access locally to Westlaw (some sort of subscription) or one has access to a library that has access, and that access is available online, remotely?
February 6, 2026 at 4:24 PM
talesfrompurgatory.bsky.social
Apparently no one could come up with any published case law whatsoever regarding involuntary intoxication defense for a DUI, and Judge said she’d “never heard of such a thing”. I don’t currently have access to westlaw/Lexis so I have no idea if they’re just truly not fucking trying
February 6, 2026 at 3:50 PM
busillis.bsky.social
"And I didn't have access at that time to Westlaw or Lexis because I didn't have the time to get to it at that time, not because I didn't want to but because I had other things going on."

I'm sorry your honor. I would have, but I couldn't because I didn't feel like it.
February 6, 2026 at 12:31 PM
roesberger.bsky.social
2/ mit einbezogen, weil die Prozesse der bestehenden Angebote von LexisNexis, WestLaw und Juris so unterirdisch waren, dass man wissen wollte, was den größtmöglichen Wert für den Nutzer schaffen würde. Das wurde eben mitnichten einfach eingeführt und genutzt.
February 6, 2026 at 10:41 AM
rszasz.saxonco.com
I wanna know his backstory.

He doesn't have access to Lexis or Westlaw outside of going to a law library. Is he actually three 1Ls in a suit?
February 6, 2026 at 6:09 AM
ubik12.bsky.social
A lawyer saying they didn’t have access to Westlaw or LexisNexis is like a carpenter saying they don’t have a hammer.
February 6, 2026 at 4:34 AM
vituperativeerb.bsky.social
Ok but “I don’t have access to Lexis or Westlaw” is an incredible thing to say at your Rule 11 hearing for citing made-up cases
February 6, 2026 at 3:37 AM
clairewillett.bsky.social
when he was like "well yeah I COULD have looked it up on Westlaw, but I would have had to go to a LIBRARY during BUSINESS HOURS and I had OTHER STUFF GOING ON that day" I was like, okay how many annoyed colleagues are feeling sooooooooooooooooooo vindicated right now
February 6, 2026 at 3:29 AM
rszasz.saxonco.com
Oh fuck, I was half joking, but he really isn't paying for or otherwise accessing something like Westlaw and only goes to whatever law library for access....

That transcript 💀
February 6, 2026 at 3:05 AM
jadelennox.bsky.social
"it should not be assumed that everyone has access to the walled garden of Westlaw and Lexis. It seems to me that you actually have access to the walled garden of Westlaw or Lexis if only you would go to the law library to do it."

Sing it, sister.

Too lazy to go to the damn library, SMDH.
February 6, 2026 at 3:05 AM
asazernik.bsky.social
He keeps talking about going to the law library to use Westlaw. Is this some kind of too-cheap-to-get-his-own-subscription thing?
February 6, 2026 at 2:57 AM
snidely1459.bsky.social
When he says he ran out of time, does he mean ran out of Westlaw credits or just didn’t prepare in time?
February 6, 2026 at 2:53 AM
resurrectedrena34.bsky.social
THERE IS NO FUCKING POINT TO ANY OF THIS, WHY DIDN'T HE JUST USE WESTLAW??????????????
February 6, 2026 at 1:46 AM
mikeall.bsky.social
I would simply maintain and utilize a WestLaw subscription but maybe I'm just built different.
clapifyoulikeme.favrd.social Mrs. Detective Pikajew, Esq. @clapifyoulikeme.favrd.social · 23h
Hey, so, I don’t do civil litigation, is it generally considered good when the judge does this?

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Case 1:24-cv-09429-KPF Document 227 Filed 02/05/26 Page 1 of 33 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FLYCATCHER CORP. LTD and FLYCATCHER TOYS, INC., Plaintiffs, -V.- AFFABLE AVENUE LLC, doing business as CJ DIST; OZMOS COMPANY LLC; EYTAN GROSSMAN, doing business as EYG DEALS; CREATIVE REWARDS INC.; JOSHUA CHAVEZ, doing business as ONESTOPFASTSHOP; TOP EXPERIENCE COMPANY LLC, doing business as WE PAY COST LLC; PRETTY PRINCESS LLC, doing business as NORVI; AYANEE LLC; FORTUNA KG LLC, doing business as FORTUNAKG; JASON MANAGEMENT LLC; JOAN ALEXANDER SORIANO, doing business as PRIMECHOICEMART; A WAHABI CORPORATION, doing business as MCPROFITS; MODA ORIGINAL LLC; VALLEY BODEGA WHOLESALE INC.; EYAD WAHBY; SAM SHAMLOO; S&N GLOBAL SUPPLY INC.; VALUE VALLEY WHOLESALE LLC; ADAM HAMIDA; and JOHN DOES 1 to 25, Defendants. 24 Civ. 9429 (KPF) OPINION AND ORDER KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge: In June 2025, Steven A. Feldman, counsel for Defendant Affable Avenue LLC ("Affable"), filed a brief in support of Affable's motion to dismiss that was peppered with false citations. Concerned about both the genesis of these misstatements and counsel's delay in correcting them, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause. Perhaps not appreciating the gravity of the situation, Mr. Feldman responded to that Order with a submission that appeared to have been created by generative artificial intelligence ("Al"), and that itself contained a false citation. The Court's response was stern and unmistakable: "Mr. Case 1:24-CV-09429-KPF Document 227 Filed 02/05/26 Page 2 of 33 Feldman [wals not excused from this professional obligation [of verifying that the cases he submitted to the Court were valid] by dint of using emerging technology." (Dkt. #169 at 4). Mr. Feldman persisted. A few days prior to the Court's hearing on the Order to Show Cause, Mr. Feldman submitted a proposed reply brief in further support of Affable's motion to dismiss. Once again, his brief contained false citations. And at the August 22, 2025 hearing, Mr. Feldman was unable to respond directly to, much less answer, the Court's questioning about his submissions. Mr. Feldman has not, and apparently cannot, learn from his mistakes. And while the Court does not oppose the use of Al to assist in legal research and writing, it must take a stand where, as here, counsel repeatedly files submissions with false citations because counsel refuses to verify those submissions. This Court can do no more. For the reasons that follow, the Court sanctions Mr. Feldman pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and the Court's inherent powers by striking Affable's submissions and entering default judgment against it.
February 6, 2026 at 1:39 AM
clapifyoulikeme.favrd.social
Westlaw actually does work 24/7, few know this
MR. FELDMAN: Did I use Al to summarize the briefing? No, I did not. I actually got the -- I read through the documents and I went through to see what the documents were. I think I may have uploaded to it -- I maybe uploaded it to Westlaw to do -- check citations on them to make sure that the citations were correct that I found. THE COURT: Wait. I'm sorry. You used Westlaw to check citations for your adversary's briefing but not your own? MR. FELDMAN: No. I used it to -- I couldn't do it on mine because I ran out of time, but I did have the ability to pull the citations to make sure that the case citations that were relevant to the case, that I addressed them. THE COURT: You used Westlaw to check the citations in your adversary's brief? MR. FELDMAN: In my own -- in everyone's brief. THE COURT: OK. Except when you ran out of time. MR. FELDMAN: No. When I drafted my own brief, my own reply, I was relying only on my own on Thursday when I was writing it and then on Friday when I finished it. THE COURT: Nothing prevented you from going to check your citations with Westlaw after you had completed the drafting of your reply brief? MR. FELDMAN: I could not do it at that time. The one citation which I had incorrect, at that time, it was Thursday night. Friday morning at 5:00 in the morning, I was not able to go to get Westlaw. THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Schwalb, I'll hear from you now.
February 6, 2026 at 1:06 AM
march-to-the-sea.bsky.social
I don’t have a JD but I can buy a westlaw subscription, will that get me admitted to the bar? I could probably even manage to be this guy’s superior in practice
February 6, 2026 at 1:04 AM
clapifyoulikeme.favrd.social
Well he used to have (or maybe still does) westlaw you see(?)
February 6, 2026 at 1:01 AM
clapifyoulikeme.favrd.social
“Sir, I’m in Google Scholar right now”
I'm not saying it's because of Westlaw. I'm just saying had I been able to do a check cite, it would have immediately flagged it as incorrect because there is no such -- the way that I reported it -- THE COURT: Even checking it on Google, sir, showed you what the correct citation was. MR. FELDMAN: In hindsight, when I saw it then and when I checked it, I saw it there. When I had it in a text unconnected to anything other than just simply the quote from the other document, that I mistakenly put in there, I did not realize that I had it incorrect. I thought that that was my corrected - the corrected citation when, in fact, it was an incorrect citation. THE COURT: Sir, I'm in Google Scholar right now. How do I get cases from Google Scholar? MR. FELDMAN: If you go to the left side, there's a triple a hamburger to get case law.
February 6, 2026 at 1:00 AM
clapifyoulikeme.favrd.social
Dawg
THE COURT: OK. It is correct that it was not correct. But I cannot understand how you could use so many sources and come up with so many wrong answers when, in fact, your adversaries gave you the proper citation. That's all you needed to work with. But you tried to pivot to what you think is a broader issue, and I just want to understand what you think I should do about this. You make a point of saying that while requiring neutral case citations has not been adopted by either the blue book or the circuit, it should not be assumed that everyone has access to the walled garden of Westlaw and Lexis. It seems to me that you actually have access to the walled garden of Westlaw or Lexis if only you would go to the law library to do it. I suppose another way of doing that is simply not to cite Westlaw citations and deal with reported decisions. But why does any of that matter here when the missed citation was a reported decision? What do you want me to do with the fact that you don't have Westlaw? It sounds like you want me to say that you should be absolved of all of these terrible citation errors, these missed citations, because you don't have Westlaw. But now I know you have access to Westlaw. So what do you want?
February 6, 2026 at 12:59 AM
clapifyoulikeme.favrd.social
She just lets him go on and on here and it gets worse with every sentence
THE COURT: All right. Sir, with respect to your response to the order to show cause - again, it's filed with me on July 11 — to what degree did you use AI in the preparation of this response? MR. FELDMAN: To a -- in terms of the -- I compiled SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 Case 1:24-cV-09429-KPF Document 223 Filed 10/20/25 Page 63 of 97 P8MRFLYC 63 all of -- I went to the law library, and I went to research the New York State Bar Association reports. I also pulled Mr. MacMull's articles that he wrote specifically. I also went through the various cases, the Mata case and some of the other cases. I also went through some of the other cases that were involved. And in that instance, I put together all the cases that I was going - that I was going to use, and I began to prepare a formal response including a basically line-by-line correction of the citations explaining or telling what they were. At that point in time, I felt that: (1) every time you put a citation online that is incorrect, there's a potential that someone else is going to be citing to it, so what I decided to do was remove any -- to change it to be more of a personal letter where I was focused on that my conduct and also the error that I made, which -- and at that point in time, I proceeded to change the -- to change it from being a fully cited motion to being more of a letter to the Court. And at that point in time, the -- what I then did was I went to check to see -- I put together all the information in what's called a NotebookIM, which is a closed repository -- I guess, repository. Basically, I put in the original documents and confirmed that if there's anything in there that is correct or if it was correct, it would give me the exact citation of the source. And if it was incorrect, it would not -- it would tell me that it's not correct. So that's what I did to fix it. It was basically I drafted my letter. I did my research. I didn't cite to Irving Finkel, but I definitely did my own research. I read Ray Bradbury many years ago, Fahrenheit 451, I felt that that was for me, the importance of -- that's where I wanted to -- and I also felt that it was important to include my personal things. None of those -- none of that information was in the repository, but in terms of my reference to the information that was in the CLE materials that I reviewed in terms of the cautioning of using AI, in terms of the proper or improper usage of it, I also referred to to try to understand, you know, better how Westlaw citations, again, I had - much of that was in the repository, so I kept it there. For example, I had to refer back to it and say is this quote, the exact quote that I have that is there, and if it's not, I ran it against that to make sure that it was correct. But ultimately I did not -- I chose to make it a personal letter where there's no -- where I was not going to be citing to anything. Unfortunately, I had a quotation there that was in fact not -- it was -- when I removed it -- when I thought I removed it, I thought I removed the quotation. I thought it was going to be more personal.
February 6, 2026 at 12:32 AM