AI Liability Legal Timeline
A chronological guide to landmark cases, regulations, and developments shaping the legal landscape for AI liability.
Key Developments in AI Liability Law
#2018
Epic Sepsis Model Deployed
Epic Systems deploys sepsis prediction algorithm to hundreds of hospitals. Later studies will reveal significant performance gaps between clinical validation and real-world deployment, raising questions about hospital liability for algorithm selection.
March 2018
Uber AV Fatality - Tempe, AZ
First pedestrian fatality involving a fully autonomous vehicle (Uber ATG). Raises fundamental questions about manufacturer vs. operator liability for autonomous systems. Criminal charges filed against safety driver; civil settlements reached.
2019
FDA De Novo Clearance for IDx-DR
First FDA clearance for autonomous AI diagnostic device - diabetic retinopathy screening that operates without physician oversight. Establishes precedent for AI systems that can diagnose without human intermediary.
2020
EEOC Begins AI Hiring Investigations
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission begins investigating AI-powered hiring tools for potential discrimination under Title VII. Signals increased regulatory scrutiny of employment algorithms.
February 2021
Mobley v. Workday Filed
Landmark class action alleging Workday’s AI hiring tools discriminate against Black, disabled, and older applicants. First major federal court test of AI hiring discrimination theories.
2022
Illinois BIPA Settlements Surge
Biometric Information Privacy Act litigation accelerates, with Facebook ($650M), Google ($100M), and TikTok ($92M) settlements. Establishes significant liability exposure for facial recognition and biometric AI.
June 2023
Mata v. Avianca - AI Hallucination Sanctions
New York federal judge sanctions attorneys for submitting ChatGPT-generated brief with fabricated case citations. Becomes defining case for attorney competence obligations when using generative AI.
November 2023
California State Bar AI Guidance
California becomes first state bar to issue practical guidance on attorney AI use, addressing competence, confidentiality, and verification duties. Sets template for other jurisdictions.
January 2024
Florida Ethics Opinion 24-1
Florida Bar issues comprehensive ethics opinion on AI, emphasizing verification requirements and establishing “reasonable attorney” standard for AI tool competence.
April 2024
New York State Bar AI Report
NYSBA Task Force releases comprehensive report suggesting that refusing to use AI may itself raise competence concerns in some circumstances - a significant shift in the standard of care discussion.
July 2024
ABA Formal Opinion 512
American Bar Association issues national guidance on AI in legal practice, establishing baseline ethical obligations applicable across all jurisdictions.
August 2024
EU AI Act Enters Force
European Union’s comprehensive AI regulation takes effect, with extraterritorial reach affecting US companies. Establishes risk-based framework and mandatory requirements for high-risk AI systems.
February 2025
Texas Ethics Opinion 705
Texas State Bar joins states with formal AI ethics guidance, emphasizing practical verification workflows and client disclosure requirements.
Emerging Trends
#The “Failure to Use AI” Question
#Perhaps the most significant emerging question: When does failure to use available AI tools constitute malpractice? The NYSBA’s suggestion that AI refusal may raise competence concerns signals a potential inversion of traditional liability analysis.
Verification as Standard of Care
#Across all professional contexts, a clear consensus is emerging: AI recommendations require human verification before consequential action. “Trust but verify” is insufficient; verification must be substantive and documented.
Manufacturer vs. Operator Liability
#Courts continue to grapple with how to allocate liability between AI system developers and the professionals who deploy them. The learned intermediary doctrine provides one framework, but its application to AI remains contested.
Related Resources
#