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
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff's brief quoted a passage as from Schmidt v. Huff that the court found does not appear in the Schmidt opinion; court noted the false quote and declined to sanction.
Judges: John Wesley Broomes
AI-related case
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff’s brief contained quotations attributed to three cited cases that do not appear in those opinions; the court confirmed the quotes were absent and suspected AI generation.
Judges: John Wesley Broomes
AI-related case
The district court identified fabricated citations and quotations in the pro se plaintiff's filings (e.g., a cited Westlaw number and case caption that did not match the cited authority). The court suspected the citations were AI-generated, cautioned the plaintiff, and referenced D. Kan. Standing Order 26-01 warning of possible sanctions for fabricated or incorrect legal authority. No sanction was imposed in this Order.
Judges: Daniel Dale Crabtree
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs filed motions containing inaccurate or nonexistent case citations; Magistrate Judge Schwartz warned Plaintiffs about filing motions that contain inaccurate or nonexistent case citations. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiffs inaccurately represented Magistrate Judge Schwartz's prior order by stating she 'already acknowledged conflict risk by denying severance without prejudice,' which the court found to be an inaccurate statement of that order.
Judges: Eric F. Melgren
AI-related case
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Howard v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 2019 WL 1401348 (D. Kan. Mar. 28, 2019)', which the court found does not exist in Westlaw and for which no case number was provided.
Judges: John Wesley Broomes
AI-related case
Plaintiff's counsel repeatedly quoted passages purportedly from defendants' depositions that the court found do not appear in the cited transcript pages; the court treated the pattern as egregious and ordered counsel to show cause under Rule 11.
Judges: John Wesley Broomes
AI-related case
Order to show cause was here. Defendant later obtained summary judgment, in part because plaintiff failed to cite any legal authority (once the hallucinated material was stricken).
Judges: Julie A. Robinson
AI-related case
While the court did not ascertained whether the plaintiff's brief contained any hallucination, Pelaikan identified at least two, as well as several misrepresentations: see the report here.
Judges: John Wesley Broomes
AI-related case
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted a passage attributed to Cory v. Troth that does not appear in that opinion; court identified the quotation as inaccurate. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a quotation to Mason v. Gerin Corp. that is not found in the opinion; court flagged it as inaccurate. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted Fanning v. Sitton Motor Lines as containing language about showing 'some cognitive awareness' that the opinion does not contain; court noted the misquotation. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a phrase about 'even the movement of the toes or legs of the decedent' to Cochrane v. Schneider Nat’l that does not exist in that opinion; court flagged it. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted Lemmons v. Board of County Comm’rs for a relation-back principle quotation that is absent from that decision; court identified the inaccuracy. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Pape v. Kansas Power & Light Co. with an incorrect citation number; court noted the citation was not correct.
Judges: John Wesley Broomes
AI-related case
Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited a case that the court found had 'no bearing on the proposition' for which it was cited, treated as a misapplied/misrepresented authority likely produced by AI. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs' application for entry of default contained at least one nonexistent (phantom) case citation; the court identified it as fabricated and warned plaintiffs to validate AI-generated content.
Judges: John Wesley Broomes