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
Case screener
AI-related case
The Court identified at least one instance where Plaintiff cited a non-existent authority and informed Plaintiff. Plaintiff conceded the fictitious citation likely resulted from artificial intelligence. The Court excluded any contentions relying on the fabricated authority from its consideration and stated it would consider whether any additional action is required.
Judges: Gregory Brian Williams
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant's briefs included citations to cases that do not exist, i.e., fabricated case citations mentioned without supporting authority. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited existing cases but attributed holdings or propositions to them that they do not support (misstated holdings / misrepresented precedent).
Judges: Paul B. Ahlers
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Cited to support that general objections are not considered; court found no case with that combination of style and proposition (fabricated use). || Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited as confirming broad discovery rights though the cited Federal Appendix entry did not discuss discovery; the cited authority was misapplied/misrepresented. || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited as refusing to delay deposition; court and plaintiff could only locate an unrelated 1939 Alabama Court of Appeals traffic decision with that style (fabricated for the proposition cited). || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited as rejecting an inmate's request to delay a deposition; the court found no such case or similar citation for that proposition (fabricated). || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited as granting a Rule 30(a)(2)(B) motion and finding no good cause to delay deposition; Westlaw number led to an unrelated maritime case and no supporting discovery authority was found (fabricated).
Judges: Dana Kuehn, Douglas L. Combs, Dustin P. Rowe, James E. Edmondson, James R. Winchester, M. John Kane IV, Noma Gurich, Richard Darby, Travis Jett
AI-related case
Fabricated: Legal Norm | Previously filed an emergency pleading that cited a non-existent rule of procedure (prior warning referenced by the court) — example of fabricated authority. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Argued that orders entered by a disqualified judge are void and must be vacated; cited Fischer v. Knuck and MacKenzie, but the court found the citations do not support that proposition.
Judges:
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Movant cited seven case authorities whose quoted language could not be verified or located by the Court; the Court found the citations non-existent and addressed the issue at hearing.
Judges:
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a nonexistent U.S. Supreme Court opinion, "Moore v. Alliance Credit Union," claiming it held foreclosures based on fiat currency unconstitutional; the Court found the opinion fictitious and warned against citing fake authorities.
Judges: Hector Gonzalez
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Petition cites a non-existent Florida case as: Citigroup Global Mkts., Inc. v. Masek, 982 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); court found no such Florida decision and the citation does not support the argument. || Misrepresented: Case Law | The petition linked to Liberty Transportation, LLC v. Banyan Air Services, Inc., 982 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) for a proposition the case does not support; court found the cited authority irrelevant to the argument. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Notice quoted language attributed to Bistline v. Rogers to support certiorari arguments, but Bistline concerned punitive-damages pleading standards and is inapposite; the court found the citation misrepresents that case's holding.
Judges:
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Court was unable to locate or verify this case citation cited by Plaintiff and raised concern it may be AI-generated; Plaintiff directed to produce a copy. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court was unable to locate or verify this case citation cited by Plaintiff and raised concern it may be AI-generated; Plaintiff directed to produce a copy. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court was unable to locate or verify this case citation cited by Plaintiff and raised concern it may be AI-generated; Plaintiff directed to produce a copy. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court was unable to locate or verify this case citation cited by Plaintiff and raised concern it may be AI-generated; Plaintiff directed to produce a copy. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court was unable to locate or verify this case citation cited by Plaintiff and raised concern it may be AI-generated; Plaintiff directed to produce a copy.
Judges:
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited 'Gonzales v. Qwest Commc’ns, 2005 WL 366290 (D. Colo.)' using a database identifier that does not appear attached to an existing case. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs quoted 'Responses to objections are required unless the court orders otherwise' as from Gonzales, but the court found that language does not appear in the Tenth Circuit decision.
Judges: Sarah Morgan Davenport
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited "Davis v. Davis, 590 N.E.2d 1372 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990)" for the proposition that challenges to foreign-judgment jurisdiction must be made in the rendering court; trial court and opposing counsel could not locate the case at that citation. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited "Kaplan v. Tuennerman, 87 Ohio App.3d 43, 621 N.E.2d 717 (8th Dist.1993)" but the citation did not correspond to an authority supporting his quoted proposition and could not be located as cited. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited "Black v. Black, 175 Ohio App.3d 113, 2008-Ohio-1525 (8th Dist.)" and provided quotations that the actual authority (if any) did not contain; court found the citation unreliable and not supporting appellant's claim. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited "Brunswick Hills Twp. v. Bank of New York, 2007-Ohio-1480 (12th Dist.)" but the case and quoted material did not match the proposition advanced; court treated the citation as a hallucinated authority. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited "Moran v. Moran, 2012-Ohio-1841, ¶ 13 (10th Dist. Ct. App.)" in support of his jurisdictional argument; the court was unable to locate the cas…
Judges: Charles E. Sulek, Gene A. Zmuda