Articles on criminal law, civil litigation, family & corporate law from a Kota-based advocate.
A Pennsylvania federal court sanctioned attorney Rajan $5,000 and ordered him to complete AI-specific CLE courses after he cited fictitious cases in an omnibus motion — his second AI-citation violation in the same case, with cumulative sanctions now exceeding $73,000.
The Hawaii Supreme Court denied a pro se mother’s petition for writ of mandamus in a child support case but cautioned her that her submissions contained multiple inaccurate case citations and unsupported assertions — including a citation to a nonexistent case used to argue the Family Court lacked ju
A Georgia appellate court vacated a child custody order and issued a cautionary note about chatbot use after the pro se appellant’s brief contained incorrect AI-generated citations — while also criticising the attorney on the other side for filing a response brief with no case law citations at all.
A pro se plaintiff who used AI to draft a sanctions motion against a school district — without verifying the citations — was himself hit with $7,032 in sanctions when multiple fabricated citations were found in his filing, despite his completion of a Johns Hopkins AI ethics course.
A Wisconsin federal court sanctioned attorney Paul Wilkins $1,000 after he used the Claude AI platform to draft a brief, had a law clerk find hallucinated quotations, then trusted Claude to correct them — without human review — resulting in new fabrications being filed.
The Court of King’s Bench of Alberta dismissed John Boonstra’s employment appeal after discovering his submissions cited at least 13 non-existent cases generated by ChatGPT — with visible ChatGPT footers on the pages containing the fabricated authority.
Oregon’s Court of Appeals sanctioned pro se appellant Heather Boersma $500 for filing a brief with multiple fabricated cases and unrelated citations. Critically, she had been warned about identical citation problems in a separate simultaneous appeal — and took no steps to ensure the brief in this ca
A US appellate court struck an appellant’s brief three times after she repeatedly submitted AI-hallucinated citations — first claiming she filed the wrong draft, then admitting one error while hiding others, and finally submitting a reply brief with another hallucination absent the required AI certi
A Western District of Oklahoma court denied a plaintiff’s motion in limine after finding that cited Tenth Circuit cases did not support the propositions for which they were cited — a pattern consistent with AI-generated mischaracterization. The court warned that such mischaracterizations, whether fr
A Western District of Washington court issued a show cause order after an immigration habeas petitioner cited Ninth Circuit cases for propositions they did not support and included quoted text that appeared in neither of the cited cases — a pattern the court found consistent with AI-generated fabric