Judge criticizes NYCHA tenants for ‘frivolous’ AI lawsuit

AI-Generated Lawsuit Dismissed by Manhattan Judge

A judge in Manhattan criticized tenants from NYCHA for submitting what he called a “garbage” lawsuit before dismissing the case last week.

The lawsuit, filed by residents in Chelsea, aimed to stop the demolition of older public housing units and replace them with affordable market-rate homes. However, it appears the document was generated using an AI tool named Grok and mentioned at least two fictitious lawsuits.

“How is it fair to the other people in this room when people want a decision on the law and I’m going to make a decision because one side’s documents are garbage?” the judge remarked on Wednesday, calling for Chief Justice James Dauguste to be present in the packed courtroom.

Residents of the Fulton Elliott House are collaborating with affluent neighborhood groups to block the demolition and subsequent construction set to occur under a public-private partnership involving NYCHA and associated businesses.

Marni Halasa, a local housing activist, expressed that frustrated tenants are concerned about potential evictions. However, NYCHA has assured existing tenants that new apartments will be provided, with only 6% of the 2,056 units needing temporary relocation during the construction phase.

“I think the judge was pretty harsh,” Halasa commented. “These are professional litigators, but not everyone involved is a sophisticated lawyer.”

Initially, the tenants had filed the lawsuit without legal representation due to financial constraints, but at the Wednesday hearing, they were supported by attorneys John Loebier and Thomas Hillgardner.

“Obviously, he was angry,” said Low Beer, one of the lawyers who joined the case after it had been initiated. He praised tenant Louis Flores, noting his effective use of artificial intelligence despite not being a lawyer himself.

Halasa also pointed out that while this case was dismissed due to the AI issue, another lawsuit from a different tenant rights group continues to proceed.

Both lawsuits argue that the city did not adhere to the universal land use review process, which mandates obtaining approvals from various local governance bodies for projects.