AI Abuse Court Cases

AI-related case

San Antonio Independent School District v. Laura Becerra (as Next Friend of J.C.)

Texas 5th Court of Appeals · Texas · Aug 5, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Brief cited a non-existent opinion styled 'Alief Independent School District v. Lozano, 543 S.W.3d 118 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, pet. denied)'; court could not locate any such opinion and found the citation fabricated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Brief cited 'Hoffman v. ESD 48, No. 01-14-00676-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2015, pet. denied)'; court found no such appellate opinion under that style or cause number and treated it as fabricated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Brief cited 'Neely v. West Orange-Cove Consol. ISD, No. 09-17-00196-CV (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2018, no pet.)'; court determined the cited cause number and style did not correspond to an opinion on the subject cited and classified it as fabricated. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Brief cited 'Cutrer v. Tarrant County College District, 943 F.3d 265 (5th Cir. 2019)'; court found the citation conflated or misstyled a real Fifth Circuit employment-discrimination opinion and that the decision does not support the school-law proposition advanced.

Judges: Dennise Garcia, Lori I. Valenzuela

AI-related case

Ulish Kerry Terrace Booker, III v. U.S. Bank National Association

U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut · Connecticut · Aug 5, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Nonexistent case cited in the brief; Court could not locate the opinion or support in the reporter cited. || Fabricated: Case Law | Case citation in brief does not exist or points to unrelated reporter content. || False Quotes: Legal Norm | Appellant misquoted Rule 17(a); Court identified the quoted language as incorrect compared to the rule's actual wording. || False Quotes: Legal Norm | Appellant attributed a quotation to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9011(b) that is actually from Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited U.S. Supreme Court case 'Mathews v. Dillon' does not exist at the provided citation. || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited bankruptcy Lexis entry was nonexistent; Court could not find the reported decision. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Citation given with incorrect forum/locale; the cited opinion exists but not from the court/location claimed. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Case cited with incorrect court designation (wrong district) in appellant's table of authorities.

Judges: Vernon Dion Oliver

AI-related case

Jennifer Lynn Cain v. Hyatt Corporation

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas · Texas · Aug 5, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs' filing cited a nonexistent case Henry v. Kroger Co., including a specific Westlaw citation and E.D. Tex. date; the court found the case to be fabricated and treated the citation as a Rule 11 issue.

Judges: Susan J. Hightower

AI-related case

Mary-Rose F. Calenzo v. Waste Management, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York · New York · Aug 5, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited this opinion in opposition; the Court was unable to locate or verify it and treated it as nonexistent. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited this opinion in opposition; the Court was unable to locate or verify it and treated it as nonexistent. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited this opinion in opposition; the Court was unable to locate or verify it and treated it as nonexistent. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited this opinion in opposition; the Court was unable to locate or verify it and treated it as nonexistent.

Judges: Anne Marie Nardacci

AI-related case

Whitehead v. Moore

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District · Missouri · Aug 4, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant's brief contained two citations to cases that do not exist in the reporter cited; court identified them as non-existent. || Fabricated: Case Law | A second non-existent case citation in appellant's brief identified by the court as not appearing in the cited reporter. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited an existing case but attributed to it a legal proposition that cannot reasonably be inferred from that case; court characterized this as misrepresenting the holding.

Judges: Gary D. Witt, Mark D. Pfeiffer, Thomas N. Chapman

AI-related case

Barteca Holdings v. Tacobarn

U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut · Connecticut · Aug 4, 2026

False Quotes: Case Law | Misquoted language attributed to Ashcroft v. Iqbal; quoted terms and pin cites incorrect and did not match the cited pages. || False Quotes: Case Law | Attributed a non-existent quotation to Landscape Forms; the opinion's wording differs from the quoted passage in the brief. || False Quotes: Case Law | Attributed language about an 'amorphous overall style' to Yurman; the cited page does not contain that phrasing. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Mischaracterized Streetwise Maps as addressing incontestability; the case does not address that issue as asserted in the brief. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Erroneous pin cite for the opinion discussing 1-800 CONTACTS and WARBY PARKER (brief cited page 251; correct citation should be pages 249–50). || Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited Chambers as supporting judicial notice under FRE 201(b); Chambers does not contain that proposition as represented. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Mischaracterized Cortec as imposing a blanket rule that documents at Rule 12 may only be considered if plaintiff had notice and relied on them; Cortec's holding is narrower and contextual. || False Quotes: Case Law | Misquoted Fonte and Friedl…

Judges: Vernon Dion Oliver

AI-related case

Sorrentino v. Fay Servicing, LLC, et al.

U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut · Connecticut · Aug 4, 2026

Judges: Sarala Vidya Nagala

AI-related case

Cristancho et al. v. SWBC Mortgage Corporation et al.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas · Texas · Aug 4, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs relied on Tractebel Energy Marketing, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. for a Restatement-based contract argument; the court determined the Tractebel opinion is fabricated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited Pointe West Center, LLC v. It's Alive, Inc., purportedly supporting a wrongful-initiation-of-foreclosure cause of action; the court found this cite to be fabricated.

Judges: Andrew M. Edison

AI-related case

Kleyman Law Group, P.C. v. Kaloidis

Kings County Supreme Court, Civil Term · New York · Aug 4, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Submitted 23 fictitious decisions across 19 submissions; court concluded these were fabricated AI-generated authorities and constituted frivolous conduct. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Materially misstated holdings of at least 83 genuine decisions across multiple filings; court found these misrepresentations extensive and non-trivial. || False Quotes: Case Law | Included multiple fictitious quotations and fabricated excerpts in filings; court treated fake quotations as aggravating evidence of AI hallucination misuse. || Fabricated: Case Law | Created and submitted additional fabricated authorities after opposing counsel identified the problem, exacerbating the misconduct.

Judges: Heela D. Capell

AI-related case

Ali Jabbari v. Parviz Omidvar, et al.

C.D. California · Jurisdiction not recorded · Aug 3, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff's filings contained fabricated and unsubstantiated legal authorities and non‑existent case citations; court identified these AI‑hallucinated case law citations as unreliable.

Judges: