Michael Wein

Claude Monet, was considered the Father of the Impressionist movement, beginning in the latter half of the 1800s.[i]  Impressionism went against “classic” principles of painting in many renaissance and baroque style works, usually by painters with academy training.   Artists of the caliber of Michelangelo or Peter Paul Rubens, would begin art projects, taking years if necessary to painstakingly captured them with full details.  Impressionism was on some level, the opposite.  The best impressionists like Monet, could do a painting quickly onto a canvas, and without the level of detail that, at least through the end of the 19^th Century, was necessary to be considered a masterpiece.

Well, good or bad, (mostly bad), impressionism, to use a metaphor, has come to appellate litigation, in the form of “Generative” AI.  And with that sea-change on the horizon, at least without time-sensitive concerns of specific applicable Rules, Maryland appellate courts should expect a rapid increase in the number of appeals, potentially rising to a level reminiscent of the increase in appeals from the 1960s, and overall decrease in quality of appellate briefing.  (It was this increase on expanded application of Federal Constitutional rights, that lead to the intermediate appellate courts in the United States, including the Appellate Court of Maryland being formed, to address the upsurge in criminal and post-conviction appeals.)