AI Abuse Court Cases

AI-related case

Amparo Trejo v. Miguel Angel Amaya Hernandez

CA Maryland · Jurisdiction not recorded · Apr 29, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited this case as authority for nunc pro tunc relief; the court determined the case does not exist and struck the portions relying on it. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant relied on this case for the proposition that courts may issue nunc pro tunc orders; the court found the citation to be nonexistent and struck related briefing. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited this Maryland appellate decision as support; the court concluded the case does not exist and excised the portions of the brief based on it.

Judges:

AI-related case

Nisland Asset Investment, LLC v. Carissa Ann Gericke

Iowa Court of Appeals · Iowa · Apr 29, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant's brief cited a case that the court determined does not exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant's brief cited a second case that the court determined does not exist. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited an existing case that the court concluded 'has nothing to do with the proposition' for which it was cited (misapplied precedent).

Judges: Mary Tabor, Samuel P. Langholz

AI-related case

Jane Doe v. Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners

U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland · Maryland · Apr 29, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff (through counsel) relied on a non-existent case to support an argument; the Court found the citation fabricated and refused to consider the proposition drawn from it.

Judges: Stephanie Agli Gallagher

AI-related case

In re W.B.

CA California (5d) · Jurisdiction not recorded · Apr 29, 2026

Judges:

AI-related case

Bathsheba Nichole Adams v. Kiewit Infrastructure West Company, et al.

U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona · Arizona · Apr 29, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited “Ellsworth v. Am. Arbitration Ass'n, 148 Ariz. 17, 19 (App. 1985),” which the Court found does not exist; the Court identified a likely intended real case as Ellsworth v. Am. Arb. Ass'n, 148 P.3d 983 (Utah 2006) (arbitration issue). || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited “Aguilar v. ASARCO” at 780 F.3d 1101 as a Ninth Circuit case; the Court noted no such Ninth Circuit opinion exists and that 780 F.3d 1101 corresponds to Lary v. Trinity Phys. Fin. & Ins. Services (11th Cir. 2015).

Judges: Diane Joyce Humetewa

AI-related case

Tunstall v. Alabama Department of Corrections

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama · Alabama · Apr 28, 2026

False Quotes: Case Law | Counsel attributed the phrase "'Resign or be fired' scenarios are classic jury questions" to Thomas v. Dillard; the court reviewed Thomas and found no such language, calling the quotation a misattribution/fabrication and warning about Rule 11 implications.

Judges: R. David Proctor

AI-related case

Brandon Rulund Akins v. Tashi Latwon Ratliff, et al.

M.D. North Carolina · Jurisdiction not recorded · Apr 28, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited two federal decisions with docket numbers and Westlaw citations that the court reports do not exist as cited. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent case at the given citation; court found the citation does not exist as cited. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff relied on a cited North Carolina appellate case that the court found not to exist at the cited authority. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited this state-court authority at an incorrect/nonexistent citation; court flagged it as inaccurate. || Fabricated: Case Law | Federal case citation in plaintiff's filings does not exist at the cited report; court identified it as a fabricated or inaccurate citation. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited an M.D.N.C. decision and citation that the court states does not exist at that citation. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff referenced a case name without identifying information; court treated the unsupported citation as inaccurate. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff asserted the existence of a 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court COVID-related decision supporting insurer liability; court found that characterization inacc…

Judges:

AI-related case

Tekoma Chaney v. Transdev Services Inc. et al.

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California · California · Apr 28, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Attributed 'In re Shubert, 799 F.3d 1124, 1129 (9th Cir. 2015)' as authority in Plaintiff's Opposition to Ogilvie's MSJ (p.17); Court found the case fabricated and the reporter/pincite corresponds to an unrelated real case. || Fabricated: Case Law | Same fabricated citation used twice in Plaintiff's Opposition to Transdev's MSJ (Opp'n TMSJ pp.15–16); Court noted counsel failed to disclose these additional uses in initial declaration. || Fabricated: Case Law | Third instance of the same fabricated authority appearing in briefing; Court treated repeated uses as aggravating factor in finding bad faith and imposing monetary and reporting sanctions.

Judges: Otis D. Wright II

AI-related case

Louis L. Ligon III v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · California · Apr 28, 2026

Misrepresented: Case Law

Judges: Robert M. Illman

AI-related case

Pate v. CMG Mortgage, Inc., et al.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee · Tennessee · Apr 28, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited a non-existent case in their filings; the Court identified the citation as erroneous and noted Plaintiffs' errata. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited a non-existent case in their filings; the Court identified the citation as erroneous and noted Plaintiffs' errata.

Judges: Travis Randall McDonough