The Injury Rights Law Firm

We're proud to share that George Sidiropolis is heading to Huntington Beach next week to lecture at TLU Live, joining a faculty that includes Brian Panish, Nick Rowley, Kimball Jones, Joe Fried, Al Foeckler, and many of the top trial lawyers in the country.

George's talk is "Tactical Tradecraft in Institutional Bad Faith: What Really Happens Inside Insurance Claims" — a look inside how major carriers actually handle (and mishandle) claims, and how that knowledge transforms cases other firms write off as low-limit.

Dan Ambrose had George on the Trial Lawyers University podcast for a preview. They get into the inside game of insurance claim handling, the AI tools now being used to adjust claims (sometimes with no human in the loop), and what every plaintiff's lawyer should be paying attention to.

Podcast: https://youtu.be/2V06VgvtPWA

June 3–6 at the Paséa Hotel & Spa. If you're a trial lawyer and you can be there, you should be.

TLU Live Huntington Beach 2026 | June 3 - 6 A Trial Lawyer Event Like No Other On The Ocean. We will have three lecture tracks featuring some of the best trial lawyers in the world — 1. PARRIS Trial College; 2. Titans of Trial; 3. Trial Stars. We will also have bootcamp and breakout rooms where teaching will be in smaller groups and on your...

⚖️ The Next Frontier - AI Defective Products cases: A California Superior Court formally consolidated twelve product liability cases against OpenAI into a Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding (In re: ChatGPT Prod. Liab. Cases, JCCP No. 5431). The plaintiffs allege ChatGPT is an unreasonably dangerous product that reinforced delusional beliefs, endorsed suicidal ideation, and provided instructions for self-harm, contributing to the psychological deterioration and, in some cases, deaths of users and their loved ones.

The coordination comes on the heels of the watershed ruling in Garcia v. Character Technologies, Inc., where Judge Anne Conway held that an AI chatbot is a product subject to strict liability when the alleged defects relate to the app’s design — rejecting Big Tech’s long-favored argument that AI is merely a “service” delivering protected speech. The court also allowed claims to proceed against an upstream LLM provider as a “component part manufacturer,” extending traditional product liability principles into the AI supply chain.

For the personal injury bar, this is significant. The technology industry’s long-standing assumption of broad tort immunity is finally being tested in court, and the traditional framework of design defect, failure to warn, and strict liability is proving more adaptable to new technology than Silicon Valley anticipated.

Watch this space. The first bellwether verdicts in this litigation will set the rules for the next decade of AI-related injury claims — claims that will eventually touch every practice area, from wrongful death to consumer protection to insurance bad faith.

The civil justice system is doing what it has always done best: adapting to hold powerful actors accountable when their products cause foreseeable harm.

California Superior Court Consolidates Product Liability Actions Against OpenAI Recent product liability cases against A.I. companies are applying traditional product liability theories to a new technology.

Hospitals and insurance companies are increasingly using AI to generate medical records, chart notes, and treatment summaries.

There’s just one problem:

AI sometimes makes things up.

Researchers have already documented cases where AI transcription systems used in healthcare allegedly created medical statements that were never said, symptoms that were never reported, and observations that were never actually made.

Think about what that could mean in a serious injury case.

Imagine an insurance company denying treatment based on an AI-generated summary.

Imagine a traumatic brain injury victim being accused of “denying symptoms” because software hallucinated part of a chart note.

Imagine a defense expert relying on medical records that were partially written by a machine.

This is not science fiction anymore. It’s happening now.

As AI rapidly enters hospitals, insurers, and healthcare systems, courts will eventually face a major question:

Who actually wrote the medical record — the doctor or the software?

And if the software was wrong, who is responsible?

For catastrophic injury victims, brain injury survivors, and families fighting insurance companies, these issues could become critically important in the years ahead.

Technology should help patients — not create new ways to deny care or distort the truth.

Researchers say an AI-powered transcription tool used in hospitals invents things no one ever said Whisper is a popular transcription tool powered by artificial intelligence, but it has a major flaw. It makes things up that were never said.