AI Abuse Court Cases
Search 1,395 source-linked cases involving fabricated citations and other AI-generated legal errors.
837 judge-case associations across 551 judges and 164 courts.
Source: Damien Charlotin
1,395Cases
837Judge-case associations
551Judges
164Courts
1,395 cases found · 10 maximum per page
AI-related case
Izzeddin Ahmed Abdulghaffar Daghra v. Steve Hinkley, et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan · Michigan · Jul 16, 2026
Fabricated: Case Law | Government cited a non-existent Sixth Circuit opinion 'Taylor v. Hott' at 724 F. App'x 387, 392; court found no such case and page 387 belongs to a different opinion. || Fabricated: Case Law | Government attributed the quoted language 'ask the court to reweigh the evidence underlying a bond decision or second-guess the Immigration Judge’s discretionary judgment' to the cited Taylor decision; court found no federal case containing that quote.
Judges: Hala Yalda Jarbou
AI-related case
Chryshawna A. and Jeremy Webb v. Sullivan County Assessor
Tax Court Indiana · Jurisdiction not recorded · Jul 16, 2026
Misrepresented: Legal Norm | The Webbs cited Ind. Trial Rule 53.2 and Ind. Tax Court Rule 14 but used them to support propositions those rules do not stand for; the court concluded the citations were mischaracterized, likely by generative AI.
Judges:
Admonishment & WarningAttribution unresolvedParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗ AI-related case
Lohbeck v. CSL Plasma Inc.
E.D. California · Jurisdiction not recorded · Jul 16, 2026
Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff asserted the complaint was filed/served on December 15, 2025, contrary to the state-court record showing service on March 10, 2026. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff misquoted Gaskell v. Weir, attributing a phrase that does not appear in the opinion. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Hertz Corp. v. Friend for the proposition that declarations are insufficient evidence, a point the Court found lacks basis in that opinion.
Judges:
AI-related case
Ammann v. Markel Insurance Company
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio · Ohio · Jul 16, 2026
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a nonexistent Ohio case 'Pilch v. Dept. of Human Servs.' as support for assignability of bad-faith claims; the Court found no such authority and concluded the citation was AI-generated.
Judges: J. Philip Calabrese
AI-related case
Shaddai Harris v. Iliac, LLC
Texas 2nd Court of Appeals · Texas · Jul 16, 2026
Misrepresented: Case Law | The opinion identifies an inaccurate citation Harris relied on—'Valdez v. Robertson, No. 01-19-00624-CV, 2021 Tex. App. LEXIS 5211...'—and states the citation is incorrect and does not support her proposition.
Judges: Brian Walker, J. Wade Birdwell
AI-related case
Rebecca Jean v. Seattle Credit Union
W.D. Washington · Jurisdiction not recorded · Jul 15, 2026
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff's response brief contained nonexistent authority and/or nonexistent quotations; court described them as 'nonexistent authority' and 'hallucinated cases or nonexistent quotes.'
Judges:
Brief Struck; Severe WarningAttribution unresolvedParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗ AI-related case
State v. Dixon
CA Oregon · Jurisdiction not recorded · Jul 15, 2026
Fabricated: Case Law | Brief contained citations to nonexistent cases; the court struck those fabricated citations. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Brief cited existing cases for propositions those cases did not support; the court disregarded those misrepresentations.
Judges:
Citation Struck; Monetary FineAttribution unresolvedParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗ AI-related case
Mullins v. Duquesne University of the Holy Spirit
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania · Pennsylvania · Jul 15, 2026
Defendants argued the pro se plaintiff's brief contained AI-generated inaccuracies, improper citations, and unintelligible phrasing suggesting reliance on generative AI. Plaintiff certified he used Anthropic's Claude for drafting and editing but not for generating citations or quotations. The Court reviewed cited examples (Phillips; Max's Seafood; Twombly; PBGC), found no fabricated or non-existent authorities and concluded the citations, while sometimes inapt or confusing, did not constitute sanctionable AI hallucinations. The motion to strike was denied and no sanctions were imposed.
Judges: Marilyn Jean Horan
AI-related case
Arrieta v. Cervantes
CA Arizona · Jurisdiction not recorded · Jul 15, 2026
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'State v. Gilman', a case the court identified as nonexistent and rejected reliance on it. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'Silva v. De Mendoza', another case the court identified as nonexistent.
Judges:
AI-related case
Christine Thomas v. United States Department of Justice, et al.
E.D. North Carolina · Jurisdiction not recorded · Jul 15, 2026
Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited a non-existent case 'Bowers v. Transp. Sec. Admin., 2015 WL 3442014, at *2 (E.D. Va. May 27, 2015)'; after the Court's order counsel could not locate the opinion and acknowledged it was fabricated, likely originating from an internet/AI-generated search result.
Judges:
