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 Massachusetts Superior Court denied a Morgan & Morgan attorney’s pro hac vice application based on his prior Wyoming AI sanction — where Morgan & Morgan’s in-house ‘MX2.law’ AI platform generated 8 hallucinated case citations that the attorney signed without reading. AI sanctions now travel across
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
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 Michigan Court of Appeals zoning opinion was flagged by Westlaw for containing citation references that are incorrect or do not exist — with the AI hallucinations originating in the court’s own published opinion, not a party’s brief. A rare and alarming escalation of the AI hallucination problem.
A California federal court ordered attorney Kevin Little to show cause why he should not be sanctioned after his opposition brief displayed three hallmarks of AI hallucination: non-existent cases, fabricated quotes from real cases, and unsupported legal representations.
A pro se appellant in a post-dissolution civil lawsuit filed an appellate brief containing citations to nonexistent authorities and fictitious holdings. The Illinois Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s dismissal on the merits, granted defense sanctions for the AI-hallucinated
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
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
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.