Why Did AI Give Me a Different Answer Than My Nebraska Lawyer?
You typed a question about your divorce or custody case into ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or Copilot and got a confident, tidy answer. Then your lawyer told you something different. Now you're wondering who's right, and what you might be missing.
An AI answer and your lawyer's advice may differ because they started from different facts, sources, assumptions, or legal standards. Either answer should be checked against current Nebraska law and the evidence in your case. The useful questions are concrete. Did the tool apply another state's law? Did it miss a recent change? Did it cite authority that doesn't exist or doesn't say what it claims? Did it lack important information about your case? And how much of the outcome depends on how a court weighs the evidence?
Some of these gaps show up in everyday Nebraska questions:
Nebraska divides marital property equitably, not automatically 50/50.
The general age of majority is 19, not 18.
A divorce can't be heard until at least 60 days after service is perfected.
The "142 days" figure you may see online is a child support rule, not the definition of joint custody.
Since July 2026, Nebraska's custody best-interests factors include one addressing children's equal access to both parents. It is one factor among several, not a presumption of equal time.
The Nebraska Supreme Court addressed fabricated legal citations twice in 2026, both times in appeals arising from divorce litigation. In Prososki v. Regan, it struck a lawyer's brief containing fictitious cases and quotations, dismissed the appeal, and referred the lawyer to the Counsel for Discipline. In Shannon v. Shannon, it struck the brief of a self-represented parent who admitted using generative AI. The court made clear that self-represented litigants are held to the same standard as lawyers.
If an AI answer conflicts with your lawyer's advice, don't ignore it and don't act on it alone. Save the conversation, note what you told the tool, and bring it to your lawyer with your questions. Keep following existing court orders and deadlines while you sort it out, and never delay urgent safety help.
The Short Answer: Compare the Facts and Verified Sources Behind Each Answer
Generative AI tools produce answers by predicting what a helpful response would say. Depending on the tool and how it's used, an answer may draw on general training, documents you uploaded, connected sources, or a web search. That flexibility makes these tools useful for general explanations and for organizing your thoughts. It also means an answer can sound equally confident whether or not it rests on verified, current Nebraska authority.
A lawyer's advice isn't automatically right just because it came from a lawyer, either. The same two questions apply to both answers: which facts did it rely on, and which sources support it? A Nebraska lawyer should be able to point to the statutes, court rules, and appellate decisions behind the advice and explain how the evidence in your case fits them.
When the two answers point in different directions, the five areas below are good places to look.
Reason 1: The Answer May Not Have Had the Facts That Change the Analysis
A chatbot's answer depends on the information available to it. If the relevant documents and reliable sources weren't provided or accessed, the answer may leave out facts that change the analysis. Even when documents are available, a tool can misread them or skip the follow-up questions a lawyer would ask.
A Custody Example
Say you ask, "I've always been the primary caregiver. Will I get sole custody in Nebraska?" A general answer may suggest that primary caregivers usually do. Nebraska custody doesn't start from a presumption like that. Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-364(2), the court:
decides custody based on the child's best interests,
may not prefer either parent based on the parent's sex or disability, and
subject to a statutory exception, doesn't presume either parent is more fit or suitable than the other.
Under the Nebraska Parenting Act, the best-interests analysis includes:
the child's relationship with each parent,
the wishes of a child old enough to give sound reasons,
the child's general health, welfare, and social behavior, and
credible evidence of abuse, including child abuse or neglect and domestic intimate partner abuse.
As of July 18, 2026, the statute also includes credible evidence of increased intellectual and social growth in children who have equal access to both parents (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2923(6), as amended by LB 965). That new factor is part of the individualized best-interests analysis. It doesn't, by itself, create an equal-time arrangement or a presumption of joint custody. A court must still make the findings the statute requires before ordering joint custody (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-364(3)).
Primary caregiving can matter a great deal, because it bears directly on the child's relationship with each parent. But it is evidence within the analysis, not a shortcut around it. Your lawyer will want to know what a short prompt probably left out:
the current parenting schedule,
the distance between homes,
how the two of you communicate,
any safety concerns, and
what the evidence will show about each of these.
An Inheritance Example
Or say you ask, "My inheritance is separate property in a Nebraska divorce, right?" Nebraska generally treats property received by gift or inheritance as nonmarital. But the spouse claiming that property is nonmarital has the burden of proving it, and what happened to the money afterward matters.
In Backhaus v. Backhaus, 318 Neb. 891, 20 N.W.3d 81 (2025), the Nebraska Supreme Court upheld a trial judge's finding that inherited money in a joint savings account remained the husband's nonmarital property. The court confirmed that credible testimony can establish a nonmarital interest without documentary proof of every detail. The result still depended on the evidence and reasonable inferences in that particular record. Preserving available financial records remains important.
A Different Problem: Financed Property With Mixed Interests
Stava v. Stava addressed a related but different issue. It concerned property with both marital and nonmarital interests, where marital funds were used to pay down debt. In its 2024 decision, the court expressly adopted the "source of funds" rule (Stava v. Stava, 318 Neb. 32, 13 N.W.3d 184 (2024)).
In a 2026 decision in the same case, the court clarified how the rule works (Stava v. Stava, 321 Neb. 886 (2026)):
Loan payments count toward the asset that was acquired with the borrowed money.
Using separately owned property as collateral doesn't, by itself, make loan payments contributions toward that collateral.
The asset's value and the marital and separate contributions must be established with evidence.
Land and improvements may need to be analyzed separately.
Neither case offers a one-size-fits-all answer. Whether property stays separate can depend on where the money went, what the loan proceeds actually bought, what records exist, and how the evidence holds up in court.
Reason 2: The Answer May Have Blended in Other States' Rules
Family law varies from one state to the next, and general answers can mix rules together. Here are common claims that need Nebraska-specific qualifications.
"Marital property gets split 50/50." Nebraska courts divide the marital estate equitably under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365. Nebraska appellate decisions describe a three-step process: classify property as marital or nonmarital, value the marital assets and liabilities, and divide the net marital estate (see, e.g., Stava, 318 Neb. 32; Backhaus, 318 Neb. 891). Depending on the facts, an equitable division may or may not be an equal one.
"Mothers get custody of young children." Nebraska law bars a custody preference based on a parent's sex (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-364(2)). Custody turns on the child's best interests.
"Child support ends at 18." Nebraska's general age of majority is 19. Marriage ends minority, and the statute gives people certain specific rights at 18 (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2101). A child support obligation generally ends when the child reaches 19, marries, dies, or is emancipated by a court, unless the support order specifically extends support (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-371.01). Support ending doesn't erase unpaid support that is already owed.
"Once we agree, the divorce is done right away." A Nebraska divorce can't be heard or tried until 60 days after service of process is perfected (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-363). That is a minimum waiting period before a hearing, not a promise about when a case will finish.
"Joint custody means 50/50." Nebraska doesn't define joint physical custody as an exact split.
Joint physical custody means the parents share authority and responsibility for the child's residence, and both have continuous blocks of parenting time for significant periods (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2922(12)).
Joint legal custody is a separate concept: shared authority for fundamental decisions about the child's welfare (§ 43-2922(11)).
The 142-day figure is a child support rule. When joint physical custody is specifically ordered and each parent's time exceeds 142 days per year, there is a rebuttable presumption that support is calculated using worksheet 3. When one parent's time is 109 to 142 days, using worksheet 3 is up to the court (Neb. Ct. R. § 4-212).
"Any drop in income lowers my support." Under Nebraska's child support guidelines, a recalculated amount that differs by 10% or more (but not less than $25) creates a rebuttable presumption of a material change in circumstances. The change must result from financial circumstances that have lasted three months and can reasonably be expected to last six more (Neb. Ct. R. § 4-217). A presumption isn't an entitlement, and the existing order generally stays in place until a court modifies it. If your income has changed, talk with a lawyer promptly rather than waiting.
Reason 3: The Answer May Rely on Outdated Information
AI tools may be trained on information up to a certain point, and not every answer reflects a check of current law. Nebraska's statutes, court rules, and appellate decisions change. The custody amendment that took effect in July 2026 and the 2026 Stava clarification are two examples from this year alone.
Even the rules about AI are new. Nebraska enacted the Conversational Artificial Intelligence Safety Act in April 2026 as part of LB 525, and its AI provisions become operative July 1, 2027. The Act sets specified disclosure and safety duties for covered services, including protections for users under 18. It doesn't certify that a chatbot's legal advice is accurate.
Federal court has its own rule. Under the civil rules of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska, parties who use generative AI in a filing must verify its contents. A noncompliant filing may be stricken or lead to sanctions (NECivR 7.1(d)(2)).
Reason 4: The Answer May Cite Law That Isn't Real
AI tools can produce case names, citations, and quotations that look authentic but don't exist. They can also cite real cases for things those cases don't say. In 2026, the Nebraska Supreme Court confronted this problem twice in appeals arising from divorce litigation.
Prososki v. Regan (March 2026)
Prososki v. Regan, 321 Neb. 38, 32 N.W.3d 593 (2026), was an appeal from a dissolution decree. The father's appellate brief contained fictitious cases, made-up quotations, and real cases cited for propositions they didn't support. One fabricated quotation was used to argue that Nebraska law favors joint custody. The court explained that Nebraska law doesn't favor or disfavor any particular custody arrangement; custody turns on the child's best interests.
The court described the material as potentially AI-generated but didn't need to determine where the errors came from. It held that, regardless of the source, submitting a brief riddled with fabricated citations violates a lawyer's duty of candor. The court struck the brief, dismissed the father's appeal, and referred his attorney to the Counsel for Discipline.
Shannon v. Shannon (October 2026)
In Shannon v. Shannon, 322 Neb. 451 (2026), a self-represented father appealed a Sarpy County District Court order finding him in contempt after the divorce decree was entered. His brief contained fictitious cases and misstatements of law that resulted from his admitted use of generative AI. The court struck the brief, reviewed the case only for plain error, and affirmed.
The court noted that the Nebraska Rules of Professional Conduct, which govern lawyers, didn't apply to him. Even so, it emphasized that self-represented litigants are held to the same standard as practicing attorneys and owe the court the same candor. The court stopped short of dismissing his appeal, but it warned that dismissal may follow in future cases.
The lesson isn't that AI is useless. A legal citation from an AI tool is a lead to check, not a source to rely on.
Reason 5: Outcomes Depend on How the Law Applies to the Evidence
Many family law decisions involve judicial discretion, but the judge must apply governing law. Property cases show how different kinds of questions fit together:
What happened with an asset is a factual question.
How that property is classified under those facts is a legal question.
Valuation depends on the evidence.
The final equitable division involves discretion.
Custody and parenting-time decisions are made under the best-interests standard and the statutory factors.
Credibility can matter too. Nebraska's appellate courts independently review the record in these cases. When testimony conflicts, they may give weight to the trial judge's observations of the witnesses. In Backhaus, the outcome turned in part on the trial judge's assessment of the husband's testimony about his inheritance. In Shannon, the district court found the father's explanations not credible, and that finding supported the contempt ruling. An answer that skips the evidence, and how a court is likely to view it, can miss what decides the case.
Process matters as well. In Chapter 42 cases involving parenting issues, the parties must develop a parenting plan under the Parenting Act. If they don't, the case is referred to mediation or specialized alternative dispute resolution (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-364(1)(a)). The court may waive that requirement only if all of the following are met:
good cause is shown;
either the parents have a bona fide agreement, or mediation isn't possible without undue delay or hardship;
the court holds an evidentiary hearing; and
the party seeking waiver proves it by clear and convincing evidence.
Local court rules and procedures also vary between district courts, including in Lancaster, Douglas, and Sarpy Counties, even though the substantive law is statewide.
Not Every Hard Part Is a Legal Question
Some of what an AI answer can't settle isn't legal at all. That includes how to communicate with the other parent without escalating conflict, how to prepare for mediation, and how to think through a parenting schedule that works for your children.
Zachary W. Anderson Law offers in-house co-parenting and divorce coaching to our clients at no additional fee. Coaching complements legal representation. It isn't therapy, and it isn't a substitute for advice from your attorney. Where abuse or coercive control is involved, safety and appropriate boundaries come first, and cooperative co-parenting approaches may not be appropriate.
What to Do When an AI Answer and Your Lawyer's Advice Differ
Save the conversation. Keep the full prompt and answer, the name of the tool, and the date. Screenshots work. Don't edit them.
Note what the tool had to work with. Write down the facts you gave it, any documents you shared, and what you left out.
List any statutes or cases it cited. Don't rely on them until they've been checked against official sources.
Bring it to your lawyer. Ask your lawyer to walk through why the answers differ and which sources support each one. If the AI raised something worth considering, it is worth discussing.
Don't make changes based solely on a chatbot's answer. That includes payments, parenting arrangements, how you handle assets, and litigation decisions. Keep complying with existing court orders and deadlines while you get guidance.
Don't wait on urgent matters. If a filing deadline is approaching or there is an immediate safety concern, contact your lawyer right away and seek emergency help when needed. Don't postpone urgent action while you sort out an AI disagreement.
Talk with your lawyer before sharing more. Before you enter more case details, documents, or your lawyer's emails into an AI tool, ask your lawyer about the risks.
Questions to Ask Your Lawyer
What facts in my case change the answer the AI gave?
Was the AI describing another state's law or an outdated rule?
Has Nebraska law changed on this recently?
Which parts of this issue are legal questions, and which depend on the evidence or the judge's discretion?
What evidence will matter most, and what records should I keep?
Is what the AI suggested worth the cost and risk in my case?
Frequently Asked Questions
Is AI ever right about Nebraska law?
Yes. AI tools can give accurate general explanations and help you organize questions before you talk to a lawyer. The challenge is that accurate and inaccurate answers can sound equally confident. Treat any AI answer about your case as a starting point for a conversation with your lawyer, and check which facts and sources it relied on.
Does Nebraska divide marital property 50/50?
Not automatically. Nebraska courts divide the marital estate equitably under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365, after first identifying and setting aside nonmarital property. Depending on the facts, an equitable division may or may not be equal.
Can AI calculate my Nebraska child support?
It can attempt an estimate, but the result is only as reliable as its inputs and method. Nebraska support is set under the Nebraska Supreme Court's child support guidelines, which carry a rebuttable presumption under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-364.16. Some costs, such as health insurance and child care, may be allocated separately from the base support amount. Have your lawyer review any estimate before you rely on it.
Does joint physical custody in Nebraska mean 50/50?
Not necessarily. Nebraska defines joint physical custody as shared responsibility for the child's residence, with significant, continuous blocks of parenting time for both parents. It does not require an exact split. Custody is decided based on the child's best interests. The 142-day figure is a child support rule that affects which worksheet is used when joint physical custody is specifically ordered.
Does Nebraska's new custody factor mean equal parenting time?
No. Since July 18, 2026, courts consider credible evidence of increased intellectual and social growth in children who have equal access to both parents as one of the best-interests factors. Courts weigh it along with the other factors in each case. It doesn't create an automatic equal-time arrangement or a presumption of joint custody.
What did the Nebraska Supreme Court decide in Prososki v. Regan?
In March 2026, the court struck an appellate brief filled with fictitious cases and quotations, dismissed the appeal, and referred the attorney to the Counsel for Discipline. It held that submitting fabricated citations, regardless of their source, violates a lawyer's duty of candor. The court also explained that Nebraska law doesn't favor or disfavor any particular custody arrangement.
I'm representing myself. Can I use AI to help with court filings?
If you do, you're responsible for every statement and citation you file. In Shannon v. Shannon (2026), the Nebraska Supreme Court struck a self-represented father's brief after his admitted AI use produced fictitious citations, and it warned that future appeals could be dismissed. Check every citation and quotation against official sources, such as the Nebraska Legislature's statute website and the Nebraska Judicial Branch's published opinions. Consider consulting a lawyer before you file.
Is it safe to type my case details into a chatbot?
It depends, and there are several separate concerns:
The service provider may be able to access what you enter.
Storage and data-use settings vary by tool and account.
Sharing your lawyer's communications outside the attorney-client relationship can raise privilege questions, and the consequences depend on the circumstances of your case.
Favorable privacy settings don't make a chatbot conversation privileged. Talk with your lawyer before sharing case details, documents, or legal advice with an AI tool.
Should I tell my lawyer I used AI?
Yes. It helps your lawyer understand your concerns and know what information may already have been shared outside the attorney-client relationship. Talking through an AI answer with your lawyer is far better than quietly acting on it.
Educational Disclaimer
This article provides general educational information, not legal advice about your situation. Nebraska law and court rules change, and this discussion is current only as of October 2026. Legal options and outcomes depend on applicable law, the facts, the evidence, and relevant procedural requirements. Reading this article or contacting Zachary W. Anderson Law alone does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Do not disregard court orders or miss deadlines while seeking advice. Consult a licensed Nebraska attorney about your circumstances, and seek appropriate emergency assistance if there is an immediate safety concern.