Articles on criminal law, civil litigation, family & corporate law from a Kota-based advocate.
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
The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld an arbitration award against a former Dell employee and formally warned the pro se appellant about apparent AI misuse in his reply brief — adding to a growing body of circuit-level AI accountability rulings.
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