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 →
In-house counsel group accuses rival of training AI on its materials - Reuters
In-house counsel group accuses rival of training AI on its materials Reuters
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 →
Melbourne lawyer referred for using AI-generated fake case citations in family court
A Melbourne lawyer used AI software Leap to generate a list of case citations for a family court hearing. The citations were fake, causing the hearing to be adjourned. The lawyer apologized and paid costs, but was referred to the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner for investigation. The software vendor Leap stated that a verification process was available but not used by the lawyer.
- AI system involved
- Leap
4 source articles · read the reporting →
Genoa prosecutor's automatic transcription error changes 'lawful' to 'illicit'
During an investigation into alleged corruption, the Genoa prosecutor's office used automatic speech-to-text software to transcribe an interrogation of suspect Roberto Spinelli. The software incorrectly transcribed 'finanziamenti leciti' (lawful financing) as 'finanziamenti illeciti' (illicit financing), an error that could have significantly influenced the case. The mistake was discovered on 26 May when the judge re-listened to the audio at the request of Spinelli's lawyers. The incident highlights concerns about the reliability of AI transcription tools in the Italian judicial system.
- Company involved
- Procura della Repubblica di Genova
1 source article · read the reporting →
Lawyers fined $5,000 after citing fake ChatGPT-generated cases in court
Two lawyers from Levidow, Levidow, & Oberman used ChatGPT to research legal precedents for a client's personal injury case against Avianca. The AI chatbot generated six non-existent cases, which the lawyers submitted to a federal court without verification. After the opposing party and the judge questioned the citations, the lawyers initially stood by them before admitting the error. The judge dismissed the case and imposed a $5,000 fine on the lawyers for bad faith conduct.
- Company involved
- Levidow, Levidow, & Oberman
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
10 source articles · read the reporting →
Litigant in person presents fake ChatGPT-generated citations to Manchester court
A litigant in person in a Manchester civil case used ChatGPT to generate case citations, which turned out to be entirely fictitious. The barrister for the other party discovered that one case name was fabricated and the others had unrelated passages. The judge questioned the litigant, who admitted using the AI tool, and accepted that the misleading submissions were inadvertent, imposing no penalty.
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · 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 →
Pangram reveals 10 AI-written op-eds out of 310 at top US newspapers - Pasquale Pillitteri
AI-generated op-ed content was published as human-written opinion, potentially misleading readers about the authorship and integrity of the arguments.
- Company involved
- Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post
1 source article · read the reporting →
MyPillow CEO's legal team submits AI-generated brief with fake citations to Colorado court
Mike Lindell's legal team submitted a brief in a defamation case that contained approximately 30 citations to non-existent court cases. The brief was generated using artificial intelligence, and the team admits to using AI but claims an earlier draft was filed by mistake. Federal judge Nina Wang has ordered the attorneys to show cause why they should not face sanctions for the defective filing.
- Company involved
- Lindell's legal team
10 source articles · read the reporting →
OpenAI and Microsoft Accused of Copyright Infringement: Two Media Outlets File Lawsuit - Судово-юридична газета
AI-generated texts provided an alternative to original news articles, reducing website visits and potentially attributing false information to the outlets.
- Company involved
- OpenAI,Microsoft
1 source article · read the reporting →
Op-eds, academic articles by Provost Santiago Schnell flagged as ‘AI-written’ by ‘near-zero error’ AI detector Pangram - The Dartmouth
The AI detector flagged Provost Santiago Schnell's op-eds and academic articles as AI-written, potentially damaging his reputation and credibility.
- Company involved
- The Dartmouth
- AI system involved
- Pangram
1 source article · read the reporting →
South African magistrate cautions against blind trust in AI after ChatGPT generates fictitious case law
In a defamation case in Johannesburg, lawyers for plaintiff Michelle Parker used ChatGPT to find supporting judgments, but the cases turned out to be entirely fictitious, generated by the AI's hallucination. The opposing counsel and law librarians could not locate the cited judgments, leading to the discovery that they were fabricated. The magistrate found no intent to mislead but ordered Parker to pay punitive costs, warning against relying on AI without verification.
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
4 source articles · read the reporting →
Grammarly pulls AI tool that impersonated writers without consent
Grammarly, operated by Superhuman, disabled its Expert Review AI feature that offered writing suggestions in the style of famous authors like Stephen King and Julia Angwin. The tool used writers' names and personas without consent, leading to a class-action lawsuit filed in New York alleging misappropriation of identities for commercial gain. Investigative journalist Julia Angwin described the imitation as a 'slopperganger' that gave poor advice. Superhuman's CEO apologised, acknowledging the tool had 'misrepresented' the voices of experts, and the company removed it for redesign.
- Company involved
- Superhuman
- AI system involved
- Grammarly Expert Review
5 source articles · read the reporting →
FACIL'iti sues accessibility consultant Julie Moynat over critical tweet
In November 2020, Julie Moynat, a web accessibility consultant, tweeted criticism of FACIL'iti, an accessibility product. FACIL'iti sent a formal notice to her employer and later subpoenaed her for denigration in May 2021. Moynat is raising funds for her legal defense. The case is ongoing at the Judiciary Tribunal of Paris.
- Company involved
- FACIL'iti
- AI system involved
- FACIL'iti
10 source articles · read the reporting →
OpenAI ordered to pay damages for ChatGPT copyright infringement in Germany
A Munich court ruled that OpenAI's ChatGPT violated German copyright law by reproducing protected song lyrics without a license. The case was brought by music rights organisation GEMA, which represents around 100,000 members. The court ordered OpenAI to pay undisclosed damages. OpenAI disagrees with the ruling and is considering next steps.
- Company involved
- OpenAI
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
4 source articles · read the reporting →
Fake AI law firm sends DMCA threats for SEO backlinks
Ernie Smith, writer of the Tedium newsletter, received a DMCA copyright notice from 'Commonwealth Legal', a firm that appears to be entirely fabricated using AI-generated images and text. The notice demanded he add a backlink to the gadget review site Tech4Gods for a keyfob photo legitimately sourced from Unsplash. The scheme is designed to generate fake SEO gains through backlinks, and Smith did not receive any follow-up after the stated deadline.
- Company involved
- Commonwealth Legal
- AI system involved
- Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) model
1 source article · read the reporting →
Google Docs' inclusive writing AI under fire for annoying suggestions
Google Docs introduced an AI-powered 'assistive writing' feature that suggests inclusive language edits, such as changing 'policemen' to 'police officers'. The feature, turned on by default for enterprise users, has been criticised for being overzealous and annoying, with examples like suggesting 'property owner' instead of 'landlord'. Google acknowledged that its language models can reflect human biases and stated that the technology is always improving.
- Company involved
- Google
- AI system involved
- Assistive writing
5 source articles · read the reporting →
In re Marla C. Martin (N.D. Illinois (Bankruptcy)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Sanction of $5,500 and mandatory AI education
Generated fake case citations used in a legal brief, misleading the court and opposing parties.
- Company involved
- Semrad
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · 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 →
APT28 uses LLM-powered malware LAMEHUG against Ukraine's security and defence sector
CERT-UA reports that the threat group UAC-0001 (APT28) distributed phishing emails to Ukrainian executive bodies, impersonating a ministry representative. The emails contained a malicious attachment that deployed LAMEHUG, a Python-based tool which uses the Qwen 2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct large language model via Hugging Face to generate commands for data collection and exfiltration. The malware gathered system information and searched for Microsoft Office, TXT and PDF documents in common user directories, exfiltrating them via SFTP or HTTP POST requests.
- Company involved
- UAC-0001 (APT28)
- AI system involved
- LAMEHUG
2 source articles · read the reporting →
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna denies staff used AI to draft defence amendment
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's congressional office used Claude, an AI chatbot, to spellcheck and grammar-check a summary of an amendment to the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act. Screenshots of the summary circulated online because it still contained the text 'Claude responded:'. Luna initially said staff used AI to correct draft text and did not edit it, then clarified that AI was only used on the summary and that no legislation is drafted with AI. The incident drew public speculation about AI use in legislative work.
- Company involved
- Office of Rep. Anna Paulina Luna
- AI system involved
- Claude
2 source articles · read the reporting →
