That is a misleading argument. The judge rejects the pleading, the client can sue the lawyer and the lawyer has no recourse as the AI model comes with a warning that it may make things up, please check all answers.
However, if the AI is sold as an incredibly effective tool to increase productivity, implying that no checks are needed, but in actual use occasionally kills someone, both the user and the AI tool maker are responsible.
In case of coding, for example, no productivity increase can be had if quality control with possible bug fixes are required. In my opinion AI is vastly being oversold.
Can you name one AI company that has made that claim?
What corporate attorney in their right mind would allow that claim to be made?