(Subscription required) Early this summer, I ran an experiment in which I gave ChatGPT-4 and ChatGPT-5 only the oral argument transcripts from the court's last 25 cases and asked them to predict the outcome and the vote. Here were the results.

Div. Three of the Fourth District Court of Appeal yesterday declined to sanction a self-represented litigant over her citation to nonexistent case law in appellate briefing, acknowledging that the action was “serious and sanctionable” but declaring that the requested amount of $10,000 was “grossly excessive” where the fictitious jurisprudence was used to cite correct legal principles and the request was not raised in a formal motion.

Justice Carin T. Fujisaki wrote: “Considering the language and purpose of section 859b and its place in the overall statutory scheme governing the amendment, dismissal, and refiling of complaints, as well as case law emphasizing the absolute nature of the 60-day limit, we conclude that where, as here, a defendant does not personally waive the limit when being arraigned or entering a plea on an original complaint, an arraignment or plea that is necessitated by an amended complaint does not restart a new 60-day period for purposes of section 859b.”

The unpublished opinion by Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert affirms a decision by Ventura Superior Court Judge Michele M. Castillo denying a domestic violence restraining order (“DVRO”) sought by actress/model Jennifer (“Jenn”) DeLeo, pursuant to the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (“DVPA”), against her her husband, guitarist/actor/composer Dean DeLeo.