Incidents gathered from public reporting around the world. Each one links to the articles it came from. None of it is a finding that anyone broke the law.
Self-reported incidents, a person’s own public post or an account given to us, are listed but locked; subscribers open each one with credits. Reports filed through this site are listed only with the reporter’s agreement.
Press reportingSelf-reported: a person’s own public post · 10 creditsSelf-reported: told to us directly · 25 credits
Attorney H. Gregory Harp was sanctioned with a public reprimand, disqualification from the case, a six-month court suspension, and a bar referral for filing AI-hallucinated legal citations and deleting evidence.
The AI system generated legal briefs containing fabricated case citations, which were filed in court, affecting the court and the opposing party.
The AI generated fictitious legal authorities and arguments that were filed in a court motion, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
The acting judge's judgment cited non-existent or incorrect case law, affecting the parents in a child custody and schooling dispute.
In Tiekert v. Village of Mamaroneck in the Southern District of New York, the court found that the plaintiff's lawyer filed briefs containing non-existent quotations and misrepresented authorities. In a filing to the court, the lawyer said ChatGPT had been used to assist with legal research. On September 14, 2026, the court imposed Rule 11 sanctions: $500 payable to the court and two New York continuing legal education credits in ethics on the use of AI.
The AI generated false legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court.
The AI generated legal briefs containing fabricated citations, which were submitted to the Connecticut Supreme Court.
The AI generated false legal citations and quotations in an appellate brief, misleading the court and harming the client's immigration appeal.
The AI generated false legal quotations that were submitted to the court in a legal brief.
The system generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, potentially misleading the court and prejudicing the client's case.
The AI-generated hallucinated citations in an expert report led to the exclusion of the expert and dismissal of the plaintiff's case.
The AI system generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were included in a court filing, affecting the court and the opposing party.
AI generated hallucinated content in a court filing, affecting the legal process and the lawyers who filed it.
The AI generated fictitious legal citations and quotes that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
The attorney filed a court document containing AI-hallucinated legal authorities, misleading the court and opposing party.
AI generated hallucinated legal citations that were filed in court, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
The AI generated fake legal citations that were submitted to a federal court, potentially misleading the judge and opposing counsel.
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.
The court granted a motion to dismiss and imposed sanctions on plaintiff's counsel for submitting a brief with AI-hallucinated fake cases.
The AI generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
AI-generated fake legal citations were included in a court filing, resulting in monetary sanctions against the attorney and his law firm.
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were submitted to the bankruptcy court.
AI generated fabricated legal citations in a court filing by Shahryar Mazaheri.
Each incident is written from the reporting or the account it cites. A report is an allegation, not a finding.
