How courts and legislatures are treating Artificial Intelligence — case tracker, analysis, and India angle.
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.
The US Seventh Circuit admonished a petitioner’s attorney for including AI-generated non-existent citations and a false quotation in an immigration appeal brief — but imposed no financial penalty, signalling that a formal admonishment from a circuit court carries its own significant weight.
A Mississippi federal court ordered plaintiff’s attorney Aaron Randall Rice to show cause why he should not be sanctioned under Rule 11 after his opposition brief cited a fictitious Fifth Circuit case and included fabricated quotes from real decisions.
In a follow-up sanctions order in an employment discrimination case, the court sanctioned the senior named partner of a law firm after the firm’s associate used AI to draft a brief containing a fabricated citation. The supervising attorney argued he did not draft the brief and was unaware — the cour
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
The BC Civil Resolution Tribunal found a self-represented strata owner’s submissions cited non-existent CRT cases, incorrect citations, and a Strata Property Act subsection that does not exist — identifying these as ‘likely hallucinations generated by artificial intelligence.’
A USA court addressed the use of AI tool in legal proceedings in Blazy v. State, examining whether AI-generated content in court submissions met professional standards. The decision adds to the growing body of case law holding lawyers accountable for unverified AI-generated citations and arguments.
A USA court addressed the use of AI/LLM tool in legal proceedings in In re Marrett GFXYwRZ, examining whether AI-generated content in court submissions met professional standards. The decision adds to the growing body of case law holding lawyers accountable for unverified AI-generated citations and arguments.
A USA court addressed the use of AI tool in legal proceedings in Nonnie Berg v. United, examining whether AI-generated content in court submissions met professional standards. The decision adds to the growing body of case law holding lawyers accountable for unverified AI-generated citations and arguments.
A USA court addressed the use of AI tool in legal proceedings in United States Of America v. 2, examining whether AI-generated content in court submissions met professional standards. The decision adds to the growing body of case law holding lawyers accountable for unverified AI-generated citations and arguments.