Lawyers from Ellis George and K&L Gates Sanctioned for AI-Generated Fake Citations
Attorneys from Ellis George LLP and K&L Gates LLP submitted a brief to a special master in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California containing numerous hallucinated legal citations generated by AI tools including CoCounsel, Westlaw Precision, and Google Gemini. The lawyers failed to verify the citations, and even after being alerted to errors, filed a corrected brief that still contained fake authorities. Special Master Michael Wilner found the conduct tantamount to bad faith, struck the brief, denied discovery relief, and ordered the firms to jointly pay $31,100 in the defendant's legal fees.
- Company involved
- Ellis George LLP and K&L Gates LLP
- AI system involved
- CoCounsel, Westlaw Precision, Google Gemini
3 source articles · read the reporting →
Butler Snow lawyers removed from case after ChatGPT hallucinates citations
Three Butler Snow lawyers were removed from a case and publicly reprimanded by a federal judge after they filed motions containing five non-existent case citations generated by ChatGPT. The firm apologised and hired Morgan Lewis to review all citations, finding no other errors. The judge referred the lawyers to the Alabama State Bar and ordered them to disclose the sanctions to all clients and judges in pending cases. The incident highlights the risks of using AI for legal research without verification.
- Company involved
- Butler Snow
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
3 source articles · read the reporting →
Lawyer Under Fire Over ‘AI Slop’ Court Filing - jdjournal.com
Generated legal filings that were submitted to a court, potentially affecting the client's case and the court's proceedings.
- Company involved
- Jaclyn R. Soroka
1 source article · read the reporting →
Fifth Circuit Scrutinizes Judge’s AI-Assisted Order After Fake Names, Citations - Law Commentary
A federal judge's temporary restraining order blocked parts of Mississippi House Bill 1193, affecting state officials, educators, parents, and students, while also citing nonexistent people and misstating law.
- Company involved
- United States District Court
- AI system involved
- Perplexity
1 source article · read the reporting →
South African junior lawyer referred to council after AI generates fake case law
A junior advocate in South Africa used the AI tool Legal Genius to draft court submissions for an urgent licensing dispute. The written arguments contained multiple non-existent case citations, which the presiding judge discovered. The junior counsel admitted to using the AI tool, apologised, and was referred to the Legal Practice Council for investigation, while the senior counsel also apologised for conducting only a 'sense-check'.
- Company involved
- Northbound Processing legal team
- AI system involved
- Legal Genius
4 source articles · read the reporting →
US attorney faces sanctions for fabricated case citations in court filing
Assistant U.S. Attorney Rudy Renfer filed a response brief in a North Carolina federal case that contained fabricated quotations and misstated case holdings. Renfer attributed the errors to an inadvertent filing of an unfinished draft. U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert Numbers ordered senior leaders from the U.S. attorney's office to appear at a show-cause hearing to explain why the office should not be held jointly responsible and why Renfer should not be sanctioned.
- Company involved
- U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina
2 source articles · read the reporting →
Federal Court: Barron v BT Funds AI Pleading Denied as 'AI Slop' - Wansom AI
The Federal Court denied leave to file an AI-generated pleading, delaying the applicant's case.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Tenth Circuit Sanctions Maryland Lawyer for AI-Hallucinated Citations
Kusmin L. Amarsingh, a Maryland lawyer representing herself, was sanctioned $1,000 by the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit after she used ChatGPT to draft an appellate brief that cited multiple nonexistent cases. The court found her actions reckless and referred her to Maryland attorney-disciplinary authorities. Amarsingh admitted the error and completed a continuing legal education course on AI ethics. The underlying racial bias lawsuit against Frontier Airlines was dismissed.
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
2 source articles · read the reporting →
Sixth Circuit Sanctions Lawyer for Using AI-Generated False Citations in Brief
Attorney Howe used Westlaw's CoCounsel AI to draft appellate briefs for a criminal defendant. The briefs contained fabricated quotations and misrepresented case holdings. The Sixth Circuit discovered the AI use from the file name and, upon investigation, found the citations false. Howe admitted he failed to adequately review the AI-generated content. The court denied compensation, appointed new counsel, and referred Howe for disciplinary proceedings.
- Company involved
- Howe's law office
- AI system involved
- Westlaw CoCounsel
1 source article · read the reporting →
Attorney Sanctioned $2,500 for AI-Hallucinated Citations in Brief
Heather Hersh, an appellate attorney, used generative AI to draft a reply brief in a Fair Credit Reporting Act case. The brief contained multiple fabricated legal quotations and inaccurate assertions. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Hersh failed to verify the AI-generated content and was not candid about her use of AI, imposing a $2,500 monetary sanction under FRAP 46(c) and inherent authority. The court emphasised that attorneys must verify AI outputs and remain honest with the court.
- AI system involved
- Casetext / vLex
4 source articles · read the reporting →
Arizona court sanctions litigant for AI-hallucinated legal citations
Jeffrey Kotchka, representing himself in a probate appeal, used generative AI to draft his legal brief and submitted it without verifying the citations. The Arizona Court of Appeals found that six of eight citations were deficient, including two that referred to non-existent cases. The court sanctioned Kotchka by ordering him to pay the opposing party's attorney's fees incurred in addressing the fake citations, ruling that citing hallucinated cases is sanctionable regardless of intent. The court acknowledged AI's potential to assist self-represented litigants but emphasised the duty to verify all citations.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Colorado lawyer suspended for using ChatGPT to draft motion with fictitious cases
Zachariah Crabill, a Colorado lawyer, used ChatGPT to draft a legal motion in May 2023, citing case law that the AI had fabricated. He did not alert the court to the inaccuracies and initially blamed a legal intern. A judge suspended him for one year and one day for violating professional conduct rules, with the possibility of reducing the suspension after 90 days and two years of probation.
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
4 source articles · read the reporting →
New York lawyer faces discipline for citing ChatGPT-fabricated case in appeal
New York attorney Jae Lee cited a fabricated case in an appeal to revive a client's medical malpractice lawsuit against a Queens doctor. The case was suggested by ChatGPT and did not exist. The court dismissed the case and referred Lee to the grievance panel for further investigation. Lee stated there was no bad faith, but the court found her conduct fell below basic obligations of counsel.
- Company involved
- JSL Law Offices
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
5 source articles · read the reporting →
Federal judges admit staff used AI resulting in fictitious rulings
Two US district judges admitted that rulings issued under their names contained fabricated elements due to staff use of artificial intelligence tools. Judge Julien Neals in New Jersey and Judge Henry Wingate in Mississippi disclosed the errors in letters to the Administrative Office of the US Courts. The admissions came in response to questions from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley. The incidents have raised concerns about judicial scrutiny of documents.
- Company involved
- US District Court for the District of New Jersey and US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
2 source articles · read the reporting →
Canary Islands court fines lawyer for AI-generated false case citations
The High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands fined a lawyer €420 for including 48 false case citations generated by a general-purpose AI tool in an appeal brief. The court found the lawyer failed to verify the citations against official databases, breaching the duty of veracity and good faith. The lawyer admitted the facts and expressed remorse, leading to a reduced fine. The court also referred the matter to the local bar association for possible disciplinary action.
- Company involved
- Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Canarias
4 source articles · read the reporting →
Woody Nora v. M & A Transport, Inc., et al. (E.D. Louisiana): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; 1…
The AI tool generated fictitious case law citations that were included in a court filing, affecting the plaintiff and the court.
- AI system involved
- Westlaw Precision
1 source article · read the reporting →
Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (2) (E.D. Pennsylvania): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction, Additional CLE
The AI generated fabricated legal citations in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Mr. Rajan
1 source article · read the reporting →
Thomas Dexter Jakes v. Duane Youngblood (W.D. Pennsylvania): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; Pro Hac Vice status revoked
The system generated fabricated legal citations and quotes in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Tyrone A. Blackburn
1 source article · read the reporting →
Anonymous Spanish Lawyer (Tribunal Constitucional): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Formal Reprimand (Apercibimiento) + Referral to Barcelona Bar for Disc
The AI system generated hallucinated content that was submitted in a court filing, potentially misleading the court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Mojtabavi v. Blinken (C.D. California): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Case dismissed with prejudice
The AI-generated court filing contained false information, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's case with prejudice.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Joel A. Rivera v. Triad Properties Corporation, et al. (N.D. Alabama): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Public Reprimand; Disqualification; Bar…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were presented to the court, affecting the defendants and the judicial process.
- Company involved
- Burrill Watkins LLC
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
The People v. Raziel Ruiz Alvarez (CA California): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Published order; monetary sanction payable by Counsel…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were included in a court filing, affecting the defendant's legal representation and the court's resources.
- Company involved
- Attorney Siddell
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 →
