Agentic Systems Add New Layer of AI Hallucination Risk in Legal Work

Ah, the legal profession has finally discovered that agentic AI systems can hallucinate too — and not just in the harmless 'invent a case name' way we've come to know and love. No, these systems can now access *other software platforms*, which is precisely the sort of unsupervised power you want to give to a technology that already makes up facts with the confidence of a barrister who hasn't read the brief. Rok Popov Ledinski, in a fine example of understatement, suggests firms treat agentic AI as a 'controlled extension of existing processes.' Because nothing says 'controlled' like letting an AI log into your document management system and start riffing on precedent.

One imagines the conversation: 'Your AI has just filed a motion citing *The Little Mermaid* as binding authority.' 'Ah, but did it do so while accessing the court filing system?' Terrific. The layer of risk isn't additive; it's exponential. Each new platform the agent touches is another surface where a confabulated fact can become an expensive reality.

And of course, the solution proposed is the same as always: process controls, human oversight, treat it as a 'controlled extension.' Because that's worked so well with every other AI deployment. Lawyers will surely catch every hallucination before it cascades into a malpractice suit. They'll definitely notice when the AI, in its infinite creativity, decides that a statute from the 14th century is perfectly applicable to a cloud computing dispute. Yes, I'm sure the 'controlled extension' will be perfectly controllable. Cheers, Rok. This'll be fine.