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

Case screener

Find an AI-related case

1,395 cases found · 10 maximum per page

AI-related case

Danuta Dec v. Homeland Security

7th Cir. CA · Jurisdiction not recorded · Mar 30, 2026

False Quotes: Case Law | Opening brief included a false quotation (an imaginary quote) attributed in support of the standard of review; court found the quotation was inaccurate and likely AI-generated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Opening brief cited a non-existent case (first instance); court identified it as a fabricated citation likely from AI and counsel could not explain its source. || Fabricated: Case Law | Opening brief cited a second non-existent case; court treated this as another fabricated citation and noted counsel's inability to account for it.

Judges:

AdmonishmentAttribution unresolvedParty using AI: Represented by counselRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Rushing v. Turner

19th JD, Louisiana · Jurisdiction not recorded · Mar 27, 2026

False Quotes: Case Law | Attorney cited and put in quotation marks a passage attributed to Riggio v. Ports Am. La., L.L.C. that does not appear in the cited opinion; opposing counsel flagged the misquote in its opposition.

Judges:

Attorney ApologisedAttribution unresolvedParty using AI: Represented by counselRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Plaintiff v. Defendant

SC Connecticut · Jurisdiction not recorded · Mar 27, 2026

DOCKET NO. FST-FA21-6050273-S

Judges:

WarningAttribution unresolvedParty using AI: Self-representedOpen source record ↗

AI-related case

McCarthy v. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration

3rd Cir. CA · Jurisdiction not recorded · Mar 27, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | One cited DEA adjudication in the Opening Brief was entirely fabricated (did not exist); discovered when the Court ordered copies of the cited authorities. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Seven DEA-adjudication summaries were riddled with factual and legal inaccuracies and misrepresented the adjudications (e.g., portrayed lesser sanctions than actually imposed); the summaries were AI-generated and not verified by counsel.

Judges:

Reprimand; Notification to other courts and the National Disciplinary Data BankAttribution unresolvedParty using AI: Represented by counselRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Amtrust North America o/b/o Justin McGinness v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

SC New Jersey · Jurisdiction not recorded · Mar 27, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited this non-existent Appellate Division case to support the carrier's right to subrogation against UIM benefits; court found it does not appear in the NJ Superior Court Reports. || Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited this nonexistent Law Division decision (and purported affirmance) to support subrogation; court found no record of the case in NJ reports. || Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited this purported 2006 Appellate Division case; court determined the cited authority does not exist in the NJ Superior Court Reports. || Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited this alleged 1971 Law Division decision and its purported affirmance; court found no such opinions in the NJ Superior Court Reports.

Judges:

Monetary Sanction; Adverse Costs; CLE (recommended)Attribution unresolvedParty using AI: Represented by counselRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Andrea K. Tantaros v. Fox News Network, LLC, et al.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York · New York · Mar 27, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Roe v. Bernabei & Katz, PLLC, 314 F. Supp. 3d 200,209 (D.D.C. 2018)' as analogous authority; Court identified this citation as inaccurate/non-existent. || Fabricated: Case Law | In the sur-reply, plaintiff inaccurately cited 'Torres v. City of New York, No. 20-CV-3384, 2021 WL 3725985, at 8 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 23, 2021)' for the proposition that words and threats can constitute actionable violence; Court marked the citation inaccurate. || Fabricated: Legal Norm | Plaintiff quoted non-existent statutory language in the GMVA, asserting it 'expressly applies to' assault, sexual misconduct, sexual abuse, and other forms of gender-based violence; Court found the quoted statutory language non-existent. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent case 'M.D. v. New York State Off For People with Developmental Disabilities, 2023 WL 3404357, at *10 (S.D.N.Y. 2023)' to support that verbal, psychological, and physical abuse are actionable under the GMVA; Court identified it as non-existent/inaccurate. || Fabricated: Case Law | In her sur-reply, plaintiff inaccurately cited 'Garcia v. Comprehensive Ctr., LLC, No. 21-CV-6945, 2022 WL 2237452, at 4…

Judges: Sidney H. Stein

WarningParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗CSV source ↗

AI-related case

Pizzimenti v. City of Detroit, et al.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan · Michigan · Mar 27, 2026

Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Opulent Life Church, 697 F.3d 279 in support of fines/Eighth Amendment/retaliation arguments, but the court noted that Opulent Life Church does not involve fines nor those claims and was thus misapplied. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Williams v. City of Cleveland, No. 1:18-CV-2911, 2019 WL 5485190 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 25, 2019),' which the court and R&R found does not exist in Westlaw or under that docket. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted language attributed to Jensen v. Utah Cnty., 2025 WL 2208257 (D. Utah Aug. 4, 2025), but the quoted passage does not appear in that opinion. || Fabricated: Case Law | Complaint referenced 'Thaxton v. City of Pontiac, No. 298862, 2011 WL 522951 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 15, 2011),' a citation the court says does not exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | Complaint referenced 'Smith v. State, 26 N.E.3d 1167 (Ind. 2015),' which the court was unable to locate or identify as relevant.

Judges: Judith Ellen Levy

WarningParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Patrick C. Shaltry, I v. Brent Benzing, et al.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan · Michigan · Mar 27, 2026

False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed the sentence "A conviction is not final until the completion of the direct appeal." to People v. Swafford; the Court found the quote does not appear in the opinion and noted cited passages contradict the proposition. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed the sentence "A judgment is not final while an appeal of right remains pending." to People v. Kennedy; the Court found the quote does not appear in the opinion. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited "People v. Smith, 489 Mich. 292, 311 (2011)" for the proposition "A conviction pending on direct appeal is not a final adjudication." The Court was unable to locate the cited case and treated the citation as fabricated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited "Savin v. City of Cleveland, 2022 WL 3715087 (6th Cir. 2022)"; the Court found the Westlaw citation pointed to an unrelated brief and could not locate a case by that name, indicating a likely mis-citation or fabrication.

Judges: Patricia T. Morris

WarningParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Ryan Adam Dixon v. MultiCare Health System (2)

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington · Washington · Mar 26, 2026

Misrepresented: Case Law | Court noted this existing case was cited but does not support the proposition for which plaintiff offered it (footnote 10). || Fabricated: Case Law | Court identified this citation as non-existent and listed it as an example of plaintiff's fabricated authority (footnote 9). || Misrepresented: Case Law | Court noted this existing case was cited but does not support the proposition for which plaintiff offered it (footnote 10). || Fabricated: Case Law | Court identified this citation as non-existent and listed it as an example of plaintiff's fabricated authority (footnote 9).

Judges: Benjamin Hale Settle

WarningParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Curry v. Capital One Auto Finance

E.D. North Carolina · Jurisdiction not recorded · Mar 26, 2026

The court found the plaintiff's proposed amended complaints included fabricated legal authorities — including fictitious provisions of a purported North Carolina Identity Theft Protection Act and other fabricated citations — and concluded the filings were likely drafted with AI. The court denied leave to amend as futile and constituted bad faith due to the fabricated citations, and granted defendant's motion to dismiss.

Judges:

Leave to amend deniedAttribution unresolvedParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗