Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and others are transforming nearly every industry—including employment litigation. While these tools have made legal information more accessible and lowered the barriers for individuals to pursue claims without hiring an attorney, they have also created new challenges for employers defending workplace lawsuits.
Artificial intelligence is changing the way employment disputes begin, but it has not changed the legal standards employers must meet. Organizations with strong HR practices, compliant payroll processes, accurate timekeeping, and thorough documentation remain in the best position to defend workplace claims whether those claims are drafted by an attorney or generated with AI.
At Forework, we believe the best defense begins long before a claim is filed. Our attorney designed payroll and HR platform helps businesses strengthen compliance processes, improve documentation, and adapt their systems as employment laws and workplace risks evolve.
Today’s pro se (self-represented) litigants are no longer submitting handwritten complaints or informal filings. Instead, many are using AI to generate professionally formatted legal pleadings, motions, discovery requests, and correspondence. Although these documents often contain legal inaccuracies or unsupported arguments, they can substantially increase the time and expense required to defend a case.
For employers, the practical reality is clear: AI is changing not only how lawsuits are filed, but also how they are litigated.
AI Is Fueling an Increase in Pro Se Employment Claims
Employment litigation has seen a noticeable increase in self-represented plaintiffs over the past several years. According to the LexMachina 2026 Employment Litigation Report, pro se employment filings increased from approximately 2,000 cases in 2021 to more than 4,300 cases in 2025—more than doubling in just four years. Many employment defense firms have similarly reported significant increases in AI-assisted filings.
Although AI has improved access to legal information, it has also made it easier for individuals to draft complaints, respond to motions, and pursue litigation without fully understanding the legal standards governing their claims.
Why AI-Generated Cases Can Cost Employers More
Contrary to what many employers expect, lawsuits filed by unrepresented plaintiffs are not always less expensive to defend. In fact, many employment defense attorneys report that AI-assisted pro se cases often require more attorney time than traditionally filed cases. Common challenges include:
- Numerous motions that lack legal merit but still require formal responses;
- Extremely broad or repetitive discovery requests;
- Procedural misunderstandings that prolong litigation; and
- Unrealistic expectations regarding case value and potential damages.
For example, some defense firms have reported cases in which a single pro se litigant filed dozens of motions and hundreds of written discovery requests, requiring significant defense resources simply to manage the litigation process. The result is longer case timelines and increased litigation costs—even when the underlying claims ultimately lack merit.
Courts Are Responding to AI in Different Ways
Courts across the country have begun developing rules governing the use of AI in legal filings. One of the primary concerns is that AI platforms occasionally generate inaccurate legal analysis or even fabricate court decisions and citations—a phenomenon commonly referred to as “hallucination.”
To address these risks, courts have adopted a variety of approaches. Some courts now require parties to disclose when AI was used to prepare filings and certify that all legal citations have been independently verified. Other courts have implemented certification requirements confirming that every cited authority actually exists and has been reviewed for accuracy. A handful of judges have gone even further by prohibiting the use of AI in certain aspects of legal research or, in some instances, banning AI-generated filings altogether.
Although the approaches vary, the underlying objective is consistent: ensuring that court filings remain accurate, truthful, and professionally prepared.
AI May Also Affect Settlement Negotiations
Another trend employers are beginning to encounter is inflated settlement expectations. Generative AI tools often produce optimistic estimates of damages or suggest legal theories that may not accurately reflect the facts or applicable law. As a result, some self-represented plaintiffs enter negotiations believing their claims are worth substantially more than they realistically are. This can make early settlement more difficult and, in some cases, encourage litigation that previously might have resolved quickly. Employers should therefore evaluate settlement opportunities based on the actual legal merits of the case rather than assumptions about how quickly a pro se matter will resolve.
Practical Steps Employers Can Take
As AI becomes increasingly common in employment litigation, employers can reduce risk by adopting a proactive approach. Consider the following best practices:
- Carefully review legal citations. AI-generated filings occasionally cite cases or legal authorities that do not exist or inaccurately describe the law. Employers and their counsel should verify all authorities cited in litigation and promptly raise any inaccuracies with the court when appropriate.
- Manage discovery early. When discovery requests become excessive or disproportionate, early communication with opposing parties—and, when necessary, motions for protective orders—can help control costs before discovery expands unnecessarily.
- Set realistic litigation expectations. Not every pro se case will settle quickly. Employers should recognize that AI-generated legal documents may encourage plaintiffs to pursue litigation longer than they otherwise might have, making early case evaluation and litigation strategy increasingly important.
- Focus on compliance before litigation begins. Regardless of who prepares a complaint, the strongest defense remains the same: well-documented employment decisions, compliant wage-and-hour practices, consistent policy enforcement, and accurate recordkeeping.
Forework is the ONLY attorney-designed and operated payroll and HR SaaS company, automating compliance in a dynamic way as the laws change. If your company wants to be in a strong position for the rapidly changing, but never less complicated, workplace landscape, work with Forework.