Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9699432" data-attributes="member: 7023840">In most state courts that I am familiar with, there are a lot of hearings. Depending on the issue, the parties may submit an order (an agreed-to order) that the judge signs. Or the judge might write the order on dispositive motions (MSJs, MTDs, certain other issues). But a lot of state courts, in a lot of matters, has the hearing and the lets the winning side write the order based on the hearing.Now, practice is that the order is based on the finding of the judge at the hearing (ore tenus). But the judges will depend on the parties to submit the accurate order based on the hearing. If a party won based on incorrect law, then it would follow that the other party will actually allow the submission of that order to reflect that for the appeal. Capiche? Judges can do whatever they want, of course. But for purposes of expedience, they have the attorneys write the order and sign it. And I will note again that maybe there needs to be a much more prominent disclaimer since this kind of thing keeps happening in multiple areas that aren't checked as closely as the law. Businesses have a financial incentive to make their product look reliable.In a past life, I used to work on a DOD-related project that was pretty high-tech for the time. It achieved over 98% reliability. Trouble was, it had to do with weapon targeting. Never got to to the field. I am not against AI. But if you're going to use it as a tool, then it needs to be considered a product. With everything that it entails.</blockquote>

Verification