Articles on criminal law, civil litigation, family & corporate law from a Kota-based advocate.
A self-represented appellant in a California divorce case submitted briefs to the Court of Appeal riddled with fictitious case citations — cases that do not exist, cases disapproved by the Supreme Court, and cases cited for propositions they do not support. The court named each fabricated citation o
UK County Court Judge Grimshaw referred two AML Legal solicitors to the SRA after AI-generated appeal documents containing fictitious case citations were filed without verification. The ruling, published on the Judiciary website, holds that reckless AI use by qualified lawyers is inexcusable.
A Maryland federal court dismissed an employment discrimination claim and held a sanctions hearing after pro se plaintiff Devin Robinson’s response brief cited non-existent cases and fabricated quotations, which Robinson attributed to AI assistance. The court dismissed all claims with prejudice, fin
Chief Judge Kendall sanctioned a pro se plaintiff $5,000 after finding 30+ AI hallucinations across two filings — including 13 in a single Rule 59(e) motion and a fabrication of language attributed to the court’s own prior order that the judge never wrote. The court’s grace had been exhausted.
A US District Court in Colorado ordered a pro se plaintiff to disclose which AI platform he used to process confidential discovery materials, and amended the protective order to bar uploading confidential information to mainstream AI tools. The ruling addresses the novel intersection of AI use, work
A pro se plaintiff in New York cited AI-generated cases to support a quiet title action; the Supreme Court of Dutchess County dismissed the action, warning that fabricated AI citations undermine judicial integrity and waste court resources.
Maryland’s Appellate Court issued an extraordinary editorial note confirming that an official custody opinion contained AI-generated fake citations that have been preserved in the record as written; the court affirmed father’s sole custody despite the embedded legal errors.
A New York federal court sanctioned attorneys Levidow, Levidow & Oberman after they submitted a ChatGPT-generated brief citing six entirely fabricated cases, refused to acknowledge the errors when challenged, and then doubled down by filing fraudulent “confirmation” letters. The $5,000 sanction and
A US court warned plaintiff’s counsel in Marino v. Marano after AI-generated citations for non-existent cases appeared in a civil brief filed March 25, 2026. The court ordered counsel to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed, reinforcing that attorney certification obligations apply fully t
A US federal court struck Makel’s opposition brief after discovering it cited non-existent cases generated by AI, issuing an order to show cause on sanctions. The court held that Rule 11 certification applies with full force to AI-assisted filings, and ignorance of AI’s hallucination tendency is not