Cases and sanctions
-
When AI-prepared work goes wrong Cases and sanctions
An Orange County Appeals Court Sanctions a Supervising Lawyer Who Says He Reviewed a Petition's Arguments but Not Its Citations
In an order of August 2026, the appellate division of Orange County's superior court in California sanctions two lawyers, one of them the supervising attorney, who did not review the citations, over a petition whose table of authorities listed four cases that "appeared to have been fabricated" by generative AI.
-
When AI-prepared work goes wrong Cases and sanctions
California's Office of Tax Appeals Says an Appellant Cited Opinions of the Tribunal That Do Not Exist
In a precedential opinion issued on May 15, 2026, California's Office of Tax Appeals says an appellant in a sales tax case cited opinions of the tribunal that do not exist, and that parties and representatives appearing before it "are expected to know about the risk of AI hallucination."
-
When AI-prepared work goes wrong Cases and sanctions
The Sixth Circuit Says Citing Real Cases Did Not Absolve a Lawyer Whose AI-Drafted Briefs Carried False Quotations
In an opinion of April 3, 2026, recommended for publication, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit said that an appointed lawyer, by the lawyer's own admission, used artificial intelligence to draft two briefs and filed them without properly verifying the cited authorities, and ordered that the lawyer not be paid under the Criminal Justice Act for the time spent on the appeal.
-
When AI-prepared work goes wrong Cases and sanctions
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal Struck Off a Lawyer Who Filed Misleading AI-Generated Citations and Repeated the Errors After They Were Pointed Out
In a judgment dated August 25, 2026, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that a registered foreign lawyer had filed misleading quotations and citations "in consequence of" his use of generative AI, and had sent further erroneous ones after the errors were pointed out. It ordered him struck off, on this and a separate allegation. The decision is subject to appeal to the High Court, and the order remains in force meanwhile.
