AI-Generated Avatar Used Without Full Disclosure in New York Labor Appeal
A man representing himself in a New York labor appeal presented his case using an AI-generated video avatar of a fake lawyer without fully disclosing the use of artificial intelligence to the judge. The judge stopped the presentation, expressing displeasure at being misled, and instructed the man to argue his case in person instead.
What happened
On 26 March 2025, during a labour action hearing before the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, Jerome Dewald, who had no lawyer, presented his arguments using a video of an AI-generated avatar simulating a human speaker. Judge Sallie Manzanet-Daniels interrupted the presentation after recognizing it was artificial.
Dewald stated he had requested permission to show a video and had generated the avatar because he lacked legal representation and believed the AI could communicate his arguments more clearly. The judge stated he had not informed her that the material used artificial intelligence, though Dewald said he had previously indicated he prepared a video presentation.
Reported impact
Judge Manzanet-Daniels expressed her displeasure, saying 'I do not like being deceived,' and immediately ordered the video stopped. She noted that Dewald had previously appeared in court, testified verbally, met with her staff, and argued the case in person for approximately 30 minutes, and asked whether he suffered from a disease preventing him from speaking.
Index analysis
The incident reflects confusion about disclosure obligations when presenting AI-generated content in court proceedings. The judge emphasized that use of synthetic media should be transparently identified in any request to use it in court, as material details about the presentation medium had not been shared before the hearing began.
Governance controls
After the intervention, the judge gave Dewald five minutes to present his arguments himself, which he did. The panel of judges did not interrupt him and thanked him before moving to the next case. Dewald's case remained pending in court.
Classification
Sources and evidence
Sources not yet published
This record was researched and written by the Index from original reporting. Its sources are still being verified by an editor, and they are listed here once that check is complete. Until then the record carries no reviewer.