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

9 cases found · 10 maximum per page

AI-related case

Shantell Robinson v. Oglala Sioux Tribe et al.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Jul 29, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent case 'Reynolds v. Smith, 62 F.3d 1421 (10th Cir. 1995)'; the court identified this as a fabricated authority. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Navajo Nation Oil & Gas Co. v. Window Rock Unified Sch. Dist., 638 F. App'x 698 (10th Cir. 2016),' but the reporter page corresponded to a different case (Sayed v. Broman); the citation was incorrect/misrepresented. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a quotation to Lewis v. Clarke that does not appear in the opinion, i.e., a misquoted/false attribution. || Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff admitted submitting a photo exhibit that was 'not authentic' in support of stalking allegations.

Judges: Timothy M. Tymkovich

Party using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Lichfield v. Kubler; Netflix, Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Jul 27, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Opening Brief included a citation to a legal authority that does not exist (nonexistent authority cited in Op. Br. at 39); court assumed AI use produced the fabricated citation. || False Quotes: Case Law | Opening Brief characterized two existing cases in manners unsupported by their texts (misstatements/false attributions noted at Op. Br. 43, 45).

Judges: Robert Edwin Bacharach, Timothy M. Tymkovich

AdmonishmentParty using AI: Represented by counselRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Gregory Ashley Moyer v. James V. Murray, et al.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Jul 1, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Moyer cited a nonexistent case "United States v. Tittsworth, 630 F.3d 1029 (10th Cir. 2011)" in multiple motions; the court found the citation fabricated, noted the violation of 10th Cir. R. 46.5(B)(2), and warned of possible sanctions.

Judges: Nancy Louise Moritz, Scott Milne Matheson Jr.

WarningParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Andria Borsody v. Frontier Heritage Communities

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Jun 15, 2026

The pro se plaintiff cited 'Alford v. City of Canon City, 2019 WL 13202842 (D. Colo. Mar. 29, 2019)' in support of her position. Defense counsel reported being unable to locate the case, and the district court confirmed the case does not exist, admonishing the plaintiff for relying on generative AI without verifying citations. While the plaintiff continued to assert that the case was real, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal and the district court's caution.

Judges: Scott Milne Matheson Jr., Veronica Sophia Rossman

AdmonishmentParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Chapter Kris Jackson v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., et al.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Jun 15, 2026

False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed language to Walker v. City of Orem that does not appear in that decision; the brief quoted: "a district court must 'consider all pending motions and develop an adequate record' before dismissal." The court noted Walker contains no such language. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a proposition to United States v. Houston that the decision does not contain; the brief claimed: "failure to address pending motions constitutes procedural error." The court stated Houston contains no such proposition. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court observed the plaintiff had used multiple fabricated (nonexistent) cases in her filings (record citations at R. vol. 2 at 262–63) though the opinion does not list each fabricated citation.

Judges: Allison Hartwell Eid, Robert Edwin Bacharach

WarningParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Ryan-Michael Jarvis v. County of Teton Wyoming

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Apr 24, 2026

False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant attributed a quotation to Spinelli v. United States that does not appear in the opinion; court could not find the quote and suspected AI generation, so it disregarded the reliance on it. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited Meechaicum v. Fountain for a holding about Eighth Amendment claims that the court found not to exist and suspected the citation was fabricated or misattributed by AI.

Judges: Allison Hartwell Eid

WarningParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Kevin Lee Biglow v. Dell Technologies Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Mar 24, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Cited 'Burton v. Ghosh, 961 F.3d 1084, 1092 (7th Cir. 2020)'; the court determined the citation does not correspond to that case and is a fabrication. || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited 'Iseminger v. Dist. Ct., 915 F.2d 1314 (10th Cir. 1990)' and 'Affolder v. Johnson, 53 F.3d 1178 (10th Cir. 1995)'; court found these reporter citations lead to different, unrelated opinions and treated them as fabrications. || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited 'Bentley v. United States, 41 F.3d 593, 604 (10th Cir. 1994)' and 'Clean Boat v. United States, 833 F.3d 1224 (10th Cir. 2016)'; court found the pin cites lead to different actual cases and treated them as fabricated or mis-cited. || Fabricated: Case Law | Several fabricated citations in Biglow's motions (e.g., Paula Denogean, Young v. Nationstar, Singleton v. Wulff, In re Delta/Airtran, Saxena v. Allen, Jones v. State of Colorado) were identified by the court as non-existent or incorrect. || False Quotes: Case Law | Attributed a quote about opposing counsel preying on pro se ignorance to Garrett v. Selby Connor Maddux & Janer, 425 F.3d 836, 840; the court found no such language in Garrett. || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited 'Rick…

Judges: Bobby Ray Baldock

WarningParty using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Kusmin L. Amarsingh v. Frontier Airlines, Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Feb 9, 2026

Fabricated: Case Law | Brief contained seven case citations that the court could not locate; court ordered appellant to produce accurate copies or explain and concluded they were fabricated by ChatGPT. || False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant attributed propositions or quotations to a real case that did not contain the quoted language or stand for the cited proposition; court determined the attribution was inaccurate and resulted from AI output. || False Quotes: Case Law | A second instance where appellant attributed a quotation or proposition to an actual opinion that did not contain that material; court treated this as an AI-produced misquote and part of the reckless failure to verify authorities. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant's brief included seven case citations that the court could not locate; court determined they were fabricated outputs of ChatGPT. || False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant attributed propositions and quotations to two real cases that did not contain those propositions or quotations; court found the attributions inaccurate.

Judges: Harris L. Hartz, Nancy Louise Moritz, Veronica Sophia Rossman

Monetary Sanction; Bar ReferralParty using AI: Represented by counselRead the decision ↗

AI-related case

Rashonna Moore v. City of Del City

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · National federal courts · Dec 3, 2025

Fabricated: Case Law | Eleven case citations in Moore's appellate brief could not be located on Westlaw; court concluded they appear fabricated and ordered Moore to produce copies or explain their origin. || Fabricated: Case Law | Moore cited 'Cohen v. United States, 201 F.3d 109'; court found this citation fabricated (the reporter page corresponds to Kalwasinski v. Morse, 201 F.3d 103) and treated it as an AI-generated hallucination. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Moore misrepresented Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006), claiming it supported a particular principle; court found the representation inaccurate and that the case did not state the proposition she attributed to it. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Moore cited Gilday v. Mecosta County, 124 F.3d 760 (6th Cir. 1997) as supporting 'equitable access principles'; court found Gilday does not contain or use that language or principle and deemed the citation mischaracterized.

Judges: Timothy M. Tymkovich

District court judgment affirmed; alternatively appeal dismissed as a sanction for misuse of GenAI; Future disclosure of GenAI use and verification of citations ordered, under penalty of perjury.Party using AI: Self-representedRead the decision ↗