AI-related case

Carol L. Williams v. Tracy Honl

Oregon Court of Appeals · Oregon · Apr 22, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Brief cited 'Tubra v. Cooke, 233 Or App 339, 225 P3d 862 (2010)' for an anti‑SLAPP proposition; court found the cited case does not exist. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Brief attributed de novo‑review language and standards to Neumann v. Liles; court found Neumann does not state the claimed proposition. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Brief quoted Staten v. Steel as supporting a broad rule that private employment disputes are not matters of public interest; court found Staten does not say that. || False Quotes: Case Law | Brief relied on Davoodian v. Rivera and similar citations for propositions or quotations the court identified as omitted or unsupported; listed among problematic citations. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Brief invoked Handy v. Lane for a proposition about government transparency and accountability that the court found Handy did not contain or emphasize as claimed.

Judges: Erin C Lagesen

Brief Struck; Adverse Costs OrderParty using AI: Represented by counselRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Doiban v. Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission

Oregon Court of Appeals · Oregon · Mar 18, 2026

Petitioner’s opening brief contained at least 15 fabricated case citations and at least nine purported quotations that do not exist in Oregon case law; counsel acknowledged reliance on unverified search-engine results and some use of AI for an outline. Court capped sanctions at $10,000, required a replacement brief limited to accurately described authorities, and required certification that no generative AI was used to draft the brief and that cited authorities were verified.

Judges: Scott A Shorr

Monetary SanctionParty using AI: Represented by counselRead the decision ↗CSV source ↗

AI Abuse Court Cases

Find an AI-related case

Carol L. Williams v. Tracy Honl

Doiban v. Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission