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
Case screener
Find an AI-related case
AI-related case
Krystal Faye Potterf, et al. v. Drew F. Wessels, et al.
False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted a purported Supreme Court statement attributed to United States v. Sineneng-Smith that does not appear in the opinion. || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent Sixth Circuit opinion United States v. Abdi at 827 F.3d 533 for a docket-management proposition. || Fabricated: Case Law | Listed Hill v. Synder, 814 F.3d 408 (6th Cir. 2016) in index of authorities though the court could not locate such a decision. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited Ability Center of Greater Toledo v. City of Sandusky for a proposition about cognitive/communicative accommodations that the case does not support. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Asserted Tindall v. Wayne County Friend of the Court supports an exception to Younger abstention when it actually held Younger abstention was required.
Judges: Matthew Frederick Leitman
AI-related case
Anish Sam Mathew v. Parv Verma
Fabricated: Case Law | Court noted risk of AI-generated 'phantom' or fabricated citations in filings and referenced a prior E.D. Mich. decision (Ali v. IT People Corp.) where a pro se litigant was sanctioned for such misrepresentations; court warned such fabricated citations will be sanctionable.
Judges: Anthony P. Patti
AI-related case
Natashah Al-Ali v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited "Cottman Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Metro. Pontiac GMC, Inc., 351 F. Supp. 2d 343, 347 (E.D. Pa. 2004)"; Court could not find such a case and noted the volume/citation actually refers to a different case. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited "McMahon v. RMS Electronics, Inc., 951 F. Supp. 923, 925 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)"; Court could not locate that decision and noted the cited reporter page corresponds to an unrelated case. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff relied on Brown v. ITT Consumer Fin. Corp., 211 F.3d 1217, 1222 (11th Cir. 2000) for a proposition; Court found the case (or other cited real cases) do not stand for the asserted proposition (misattribution). || False Quotes: Legal Norm | Plaintiff quoted 9 U.S.C. § 5 inaccurately in her filings; Court identified the statutory quote as inaccurate.
Judges: Judith Ellen Levy
AI-related case
Evans v. Robertson (4)
The Court found both Plaintiff's and Defendant's filings contained factitious citations and misrepresentations of precedent despite prior orders requiring verification; examples include a misstatement of Mitan v. Campbell and improper uses of Delay and Everett. The Court struck the objections and related filings, reiterated prior sanctions (imposed Nov. 20, 2025), and warned that further violations may incur additional sanctions. The Court ruled that even a single factitious citation violates its orders and justifies striking filings.
Judges: Judith Ellen Levy
AI-related case
James F. v. Commissioner of Social Security
The court found Attorney Erin Rich submitted briefings that contained false or embellished factual statements drawn from medical records (e.g., misstating a speech-therapy note, misdating primary-care records, and asserting “numerous seizures” when the record showed a single generalized seizure). Rich admitted reliance on prior work product and that her firm occasionally uses AI to summarize records, but could not identify a specific tool. The court held the falsities violated Rule 11, found the conduct willful within the firm’s chain of command, and imposed non-monetary sanctions (CLE courses including ethics/AI topics and an order to review pending motions) to deter repetition.
Judges: Patricia T. Morris
AI-related case
Boyle, et al. v. Steven Kramer
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs quoted the phrase "circumstances of the occasion" and attributed it to Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 (1974), but the phrase does not appear in that opinion; the Court flagged the quotation as factitious and likely AI-generated.
Judges: Judith Ellen Levy
AI-related case
Loyer v. Wayne County Michigan et al.
False Quotes: Case Law | Brief attributed quotes or content to authorities that the cited sources did not contain (false or misattributed quotations). || Fabricated: Case Law | Brief included multiple entirely fictitious case citations supplied by AI; court found the case law bogus. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Brief contained citations with incorrect citations (different citations than purported authorities).
Judges: Curtis Ivy, Jr, Shalina Deborah Kumar
AI-related case
Alishia Monique Jones v. Ahmed Taylor, et al.
Fabricated: Case Law | Court found the citation to a case titled Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance Company v. Flota Mercante Grancolombiana, S.A., 35 F.3d 1134 (6th Cir. 1994) is not a real case and likely AI-generated; court warned that citing fake cases is sanctionable. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court noted United States v. Robinson, 305 F.3d 732 (6th Cir. 2002) appears to be a fabricated citation generated by AI and warned the plaintiff may be sanctioned for continued use of fake citations.
Judges: Susan Kim DeClercq