Russell v. Mells (CA Florida): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
AI generated fabricated case law citations that were included in a court filing, potentially misleading the court in Russell v. Mells.
1 source article · read the reporting →
United States v. Hayes (E.D. California): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Formal Sanction Imposed + Written Reprimand
The AI-generated fictitious citation was submitted in a motion to unseal, affecting the defendant's legal proceedings.
- Company involved
- Federal Public Defender's Office, Eastern District of California
1 source article · read the reporting →
Johnson / Estate of Fisher v. City of Annapolis (D. Maryland): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, (Attorney was dismissed by…
The AI generated fabricated case law and quotes that were included in a court filing, affecting the plaintiffs and the judicial process.
- Company involved
- City of Annapolis
1 source article · read the reporting →
State v. Garrett (CC Wisconsin): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Case dismissed without prejudice
AI-generated court filing contained fabricated case law, affecting the defendant.
- Company involved
- Prosecutor's Office, CC Wisconsin
1 source article · read the reporting →
Landberg v City of New York (CA NY (2d)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction
AI-generated fake legal citations were included in a court filing, resulting in monetary sanctions against the attorney and his law firm.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Aguilar v. The Crawford Group, Inc. (D. Massachusetts): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Adverse Costs Order; Pro hac vice status…
The AI generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Lindemann Law Firm
1 source article · read the reporting →
Erin Booker v. The Kroger Co. (N.D. Georgia): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanctions; CLE
The court imposed monetary sanctions and continuing legal education requirements on plaintiff's counsel for using AI-generated fake legal authorities in a court filing.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Adobe uses Creative Cloud user data to train AI
Adobe's content analysis feature may scan Creative Cloud and Document Cloud files to train machine learning models, including object recognition in Lightroom and Liquid Mode in Acrobat. The company says it may analyze images, audio, video, text and other documents stored on its servers. Adobe offers an opt-out in account privacy settings, but the article notes the company did not ask first.
- Company involved
- Adobe
- AI system involved
- Content analysis
10 source articles · read the reporting →
Garry Chapman v. City of Priceville, et al. (N.D. Alabama): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Public reprimand; Order to Notice
The AI generated fake legal citations that were submitted to a federal court, potentially misleading the judge and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Scott Morro
1 source article · read the reporting →
Barteca Holdings v. Tacobarn (D. Connecticut): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; Bar Referral
The attorney filed a court document containing AI-hallucinated legal authorities, misleading the court and opposing party.
- Company involved
- Hilary Miller
1 source article · read the reporting →
McCormick v. Texakoma Financial (E.D. Texas): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Public Reprimand; Monetary Sanction; Firmwide citation review; CLE
The AI generated fictitious legal citations and quotes that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Ginsburg Law Group, P.C.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Thomas Raynard James v. Detective Kevin Conley, et al. (S.D. Florida): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
AI generated hallucinated content in a court filing, affecting the legal process and the lawyers who filed it.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Joann LeDoux v. Outliers, Inc. (2) (W.D. Washington): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Expert Brief excluded/struck
The AI-generated hallucinated citations in an expert report led to the exclusion of the expert and dismissal of the plaintiff's case.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Akerlund v. Atlas Air, Inc., et al. (11th Cir. CA): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
The system generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, potentially misleading the court and prejudicing the client's case.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Heriberto Perez-Castillo v. Todd W. Blanche (7th Cir. CA): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; Admonishment; Bar Referral
The AI generated false legal citations and quotations in an appellate brief, misleading the court and harming the client's immigration appeal.
1 source article · read the reporting →
TOV Realty, LLC v. Suarez; Kosel Equity, LLC v. MacGregor (SC Connecticut): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, 6 hours CLE;…
The AI generated legal briefs containing fabricated citations, which were submitted to the Connecticut Supreme Court.
- Company involved
- GLG Law LLC
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
EPIC lawsuit challenges USPS secret surveillance program using facial recognition
The United States Postal Service's law enforcement wing, the Postal Inspection Service, ran a secret surveillance program called the Internet Covert Operations Program (iCOP) that used facial recognition from Clearview AI and social media monitoring tools to infiltrate online communities and monitor protests. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) sued the USPS for failing to conduct and publish a privacy impact assessment as required by the E-Government Act. A federal district court dismissed the lawsuit on standing grounds, ruling that EPIC did not suffer a cognizable injury from the agency's refusal to disclose information about the program.
- Company involved
- United States Postal Service
- AI system involved
- Internet Covert Operations Program (iCOP)
10 source articles · read the reporting →
In re Rosslyn2016, LLC, et al. (S.D. Texas (Bankruptcy)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, CLE on generative AI; Civil Contempt;…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were submitted to the bankruptcy court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Henry v. Long Island University (E.D. New York): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Two-year filing-disclosure sanction
The court granted a motion to dismiss and imposed sanctions on plaintiff's counsel for submitting a brief with AI-hallucinated fake cases.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Quinteros v. Harbor Distributing, LLC (CA California (1d)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; Bar referral
AI generated hallucinated legal citations that were filed in court, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Lipeles Law Group
1 source article · read the reporting →
Beus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al. (D. Utah): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Two AI-ethics CLE courses;…
The AI system generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Reaves Law Firm, PLLC v. Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, et al. (W.D. Tennessee): AI-hallucinated content in court…
The AI generated fictitious legal authorities and arguments that were filed in a court motion, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Reaves Law Firm, PLLC
1 source article · read the reporting →
Southland Homes & Real Estate and Investment, LLC v. Lam (SC California): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanctions; Bar…
The AI system generated legal briefs containing fabricated case citations, which were filed in court, affecting the court and the opposing party.
1 source article · read the reporting →
DeepSeek exposed user data via open ClickHouse database
Cloud security firm Wiz discovered a ClickHouse database belonging to DeepSeek that was open to the internet without authentication, containing over a million lines of logs with chat histories, secret keys and backend details. Wiz disclosed the breach to DeepSeek, which promptly locked down the database. The incident highlights security risks in rapidly deploying AI services.
- Company involved
- DeepSeek
- AI system involved
- DeepSeek-R1
5 source articles · read the reporting →