Articles on criminal law, civil litigation, family & corporate law from a Kota-based advocate.
An S.D.N.Y. Magistrate Judge used the explicit term ‘AI-generated hallucination’ after finding a quoted passage attributed to a real case was not in that case or anywhere on Westlaw. Admonishment issued with a clear verification duty order — and a rare note of judicial empathy for pro se AI use.
Pennsylvania’s Superior Court decided a grandmother vs. mother custody appeal where the mother’s pro se appellate brief contained AI-hallucinated citations — now flagged by Westlaw’s Editor’s Note. While the court vacated and remanded on substantive grounds (failure to apply the biological parent pr
An M.D. Pennsylvania court dismissed a habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction, but not before issuing a compassionate AI hallucination warning to the incarcerated pro se petitioner — acknowledging research constraints in prison while holding firm that actual law must be cited.
An Arizona federal court struck a pro se plaintiff’s amended complaint motion after discovering two AI-hallucinated citations and warned the plaintiff that future submissions containing hallucinated cases would result in Rule 11 sanctions. The court explicitly stated that AI hallucinations allow it
Pro se plaintiffs in Maryland filed 7 motions in 3 weeks and 40 pages in a single day — a volume the court identified as likely AI-generated — while also citing a nonexistent case. The court imposed a 4-page filing limit and threatened a filing injunction.
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario found a self-represented complainant’s reconsideration submissions ‘appear to be the product of artificial intelligence’ — with non-existent cases and dramatically incorrect statements of Tribunal Rules. The Adjudicator invoked Ontario’s AI Practice Direction and
The Federal Court of Canada dismissed a self-represented applicant’s motion appealing the rejection of additional affidavit evidence in a human rights judicial review. The court found the applicant failed to show reviewable error, and the record reflected issues with the applicant’s AI-influenced su
New Jersey’s Appellate Division imposed a $1,000 sanction on plaintiff’s counsel after he cited four non-existent cases in his merits brief and took no corrective action when opposing counsel flagged the fake citations. The court held that failing to correct known AI hallucinations is an independent
In a striking reversal of the typical AI hallucination pattern, Maryland’s Appellate Court published a custody/SIJS opinion that itself contains citation references that are incorrect or do not exist — preserved in the record because they appear in the official court opinion. This case represents th
A Nevada federal court dismissed a pro se plaintiff’s case with prejudice after he repeatedly submitted filings containing misrepresented and non-existent case law — even after multiple explicit Rule 11 warnings and the threat of case-dispositive sanctions. The court found no satisfactory explanatio