Is GenAI revolutionizing court filings?

With ready access to many generative AI (GenAI) tools, filing court cases has become easier than ever, both for high volume filers, such as debt collection agencies, and for unrepresented litigants who may not be able to afford an attorney. This brief explores whether case filings in areas that have historically been high volume are increasing due to the rapid proliferation of GenAI tools.

Consider this scenario: a homeowner wants a bathroom renovation costing $50,000. She pays the contractor $25,000 at the start of the project and the contractor never begins the work. The homeowner is out $25,000, a significant sum of money to the homeowner, but likely not enough to entice an attorney to take the case. 

The homeowner then turns to a GenAI tool and gives a simple prompt: 

I paid a contractor $25,000 for work to remodel my bathroom that was never performed. I want to sue this contractor in my home county, Faulkner County, Arkansas. Please prepare a petition for me to take him to court. 

What does the homeowner get back? A decent petition that she can make minor alterations to and file with the court (Appendix A). 

Background

While litigants in the United States have the right to an attorney if they are charged with a crime, there is no corresponding right to an attorney for a civil matter. For individuals such as the homeowner above, hiring an attorney may not be affordable given the amount in question. This leaves individuals to either drop the matter or to file the case themselves.

Keith Pocaro, in a 2023 article for Wired, stated that, "Courts are woefully unprepared for a future where anyone with a chatbot can become a high-volume filer, or where ordinary people might rely on chatbots for desperately-needed advice" (Porcaro, 2023). He argues that GenAI enables debt collection firms to file small value cases en masse, and because most of these cases end in default judgments, where the defendant never appears to challenge the case, even with errors, the plaintiff can collect. He describes it as, "garbage in, garnishments out" (Porcaro, 2023).

Many studies have shown that most debt cases are filed by a few high-volume filers. In Oregon, 10 plaintiffs account for "more than half of all case filings and consisted entirely of third-party debt collectors, debt buyers, and national banks" and only four percent of defendants answer their case (McClendon & Kallattil, 2024). In Michigan, third-party debt collectors filed 60% of debt collection cases in 2019. The top three plaintiffs in Michigan are third-party debt collectors (Advancing Justice for All in Debt Collection Lawsuits, n.d.)

This led us to a question: Given the rapid proliferation of GenAI tools, are case filings in areas that have historically been high volume increasing?

Methodology

We focus on civil cases because they are high volume cases. We hypothesize that ready access to GenAI tools is likely to increase filings in contract cases, specifically, because: 

1. Individual plaintiffs in contract case types are less likely to be represented than those in real estate and tort cases; and
2. Corporate plaintiffs are often high-volume filers, such as debt purchasers. 

To examine our question about increasing civil case filings in contract case types, we examined data collected as part of the Court Statistics Project. We sought additional data from several jurisdictions: Los Angeles County, Arkansas, Kentucky, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. These data included civil case filings by type and by month for 2023, 2024, and the first quarter of 2025 when available. Data were not available from all jurisdictions for all months. 

Findings

In examining Court Statistics Project data, we see that civil caseloads have not yet returned to pre-pandemic levels. However, the increase in 2023 was the largest year-over-year increase (10.75%) since 2020 (Figure 1). 

Figure 1: Incoming civil cases, by year 

This increase is largely driven by contract cases, where there was a 21% increase in 2022 and a 15% increase in 2023 for the 28 states able to provide data for contract cases across all five years (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Incoming contract cases, by year

The Court Statistics Project gathers annual data on incoming caseload filings, offering a consistent, nationwide view of state court activity. However, the yearly reporting cycle delays our ability to detect emerging trends in a timely manner. Several jurisdictions (Los Angeles County, Arkansas, Kentucky, Nevada, and Pennsylvania) were able to provide recent filing data, broken down by month, allowing for a timelier look at trends that may be occurring in civil caseloads. In Figure 3, we look at the moving average of filings by month from March of 2023 to December of 2024 in contract (including small claims), tort, real property, and other civil cases. We included small claims cases when the underlying case type was available but are otherwise categorized as "other." We can see an increase in the moving average of contract cases while the other case types are relatively flat. 

Figure 3: Moving average of the number of civil cases filed, by case type and month

In Figure 4, we examine filings by month, comparing those in 2024 to 2023. Contract filings in 2024 are up every month from March to December over filings for the same month in 2023.[1] In the other categories, including tort, real property, and other civil, the filings show no such consistent pattern. In Figure 4, the solid bar represents the number of case filings in 2024 while the vertical line indicates the number of case filings in 2023. 

Figure 4: 2023 and 2024 civil cases filed, by type and month

The trend seems to be continuing in 2025. We were able to examine case filings for Arkansas, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Los Angeles County for the first months of 2025. Figure 5 shows that 2025 contract filings, represented by the blue bars, are equaling or outpacing 2024 filings in Arkansas, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Los Angeles County. In Wisconsin, January 2025 filings were higher than 2024, but lower in the following three months. 

Figure 5: 2024 and 2025 contract case filings by state and month

Limitations

This brief is based on a convenience sample, drawing data from a few of the jurisdictions where it was possible to get current data on filings.  We did not attempt to look at filings by specific case type within the larger case categories of contract, tort, real property, and other. We also did not attempt to examine county-level data other than in Los Angeles County.

Critically, we have no data on whether any of these filers, whether individual or corporate plaintiffs, actually used AI to create their petitions. Additionally, we do not have data on whether litigants were represented or not. 

Discussion

We are continuing to monitor these case types. We know that GenAI tools are proliferating, and we have reason to believe that the same filers responsible for the greatest volume in court filings are, or will shortly be, adopting AI tools. We believe there is possibility that those same tools might make it easier or more likely for self-represented litigants to file their own cases. The fact that we are seeing increases particularly in contract cases but not in real estate, tort, or other civil case types provides support to the hypothesis that increasing access to GenAI tools is correlated with increases in high volume case types.

Courts should be prepared for increases in civil contract case filings. If our conjecture is correct and GenAI tools are being used to generate some of these petitions, courts have an even greater obligation to ensure that debt lawsuits are valid (Consumer Debt Default Judgments Act, 2023; Rosenthal & Clerici, 2025; Spulak, 2023). 

"The Superior Court of Los Angeles County has observed a substantial increase in civil case filings in recent years. While we cannot definitively attribute this trend to generative AI, it is reasonable to consider its growing accessibility as a possible factor. Courts nationwide — and globally — must begin to assess and prepare for the operational and policy implications of GenAI in the civil justice system — including exploring opportunities to use GenAI to responsibility manage it."

– David Slayton, CEO/Clerk of Court, Los Angeles County Superior Court

Recommendations for courts

1. Monitor civil case filings to ensure that the court is allocating the resources necessary to manage these cases.
2. Implement debt collection reforms, as recommended in NCSC's Debt Collection Reform Implementation Toolkit and Pew's Simple Solutions Can Help States Better Handle Debt Cases.
3. Consider using AI to automatically check case filings for sufficiency.   
4. Consider using AI to help manage caseloads.

Additionally, if you are with a court that wants to help us continue to evaluate this trend by sharing case level data, please reach out to csp@ncsc.org.

Works cited

Advancing Justice for All in Debt Collection Lawsuits. (n.d.). Michigan Justice for All Commission.

Chi'en, A. (Director). (2025, April 8). AI-generated lawyer sparks courtroom controversy in New York [Broadcast]. Fox5 New York. https://www.fox5ny.com/news/ny-ai-generated-lawyer-courtroom

Consumer Debt Default Judgments Act. (2023). Uniform Law Commission. https://www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=c57ddc7a-bebd-41df-b48a-018a850eeec3

Kim, J. (Director). (2025, May 12). Family shows AI video of slain victim as an impact statement — Possibly a legal first [Broadcast]. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2025/05/07/g-s1-64640/ai-impact-statement-murder-victim

McClendon, D., & Kallattil, D. (2024). Third-party debt collectors and debt buyers dominate Oregon's civil courts, few Oregonians participate in debt cases against them. Debt Collection Lab. https://debtcollectionlab.org/research/oregon-findings-chartbook

Porcaro, K. (2023, April 13). Robot lawyers are about to flood the courts. Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/generative-ai-courts-law-justice/

Rosenthal, R., & Clerici, G. D. (2025). Simple solutions can help states better handle debt cases. Pew.

Spulak, G. (2023). Debt collection reform implementation toolkit. National Center for State Courts.

Appendix A: prompt and response in gpt-4o-mini

Robinson, Diane

I paid a contractor $25,000 for work to remodel my bathroom that was never performed. I want to sue this contractor in my home county, Faulkner County, Arkansas. Please prepare a petition for me to take him to court.

Instructions:

1. Fill in the placeholders (e.g., [Your Name], [Contractor's Name], etc.) with the relevant information.
2. Review the petition for any necessary modifications based on your specific circumstances.
3. Consult with a lawyer to ensure the petition meets all legal requirements and that you follow the proper procedures to file it in court.

Good luck with your case!