legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

Every incident where a lawyer got caught filing AI-fabricated citations. The Hall of Shame.

Embed this
199
Incidents tracked
40
Incidents in 2026
$11,578
In fines, where reported
3 of 199 report an amount

The curve

Incidents per month

Last 18 months of published incidents, by the date of the court's order.

Apr 2025 Sep 2026

Charting 75 of 199 incidents; the rest are undated or fall outside this window.

Blamed by name

ChatGPT 32 Gemini 4 Claude 2 Perplexity AI 2 AI Overviews 1 ChatGPT-4o 1 ChatOn 1 Eve 1 Grammarly 1 MX2.law 1 OpenCase 1

Counts only incidents where the filing court or the reporting named the tool.

Hall of Shame

All Fined 251 Caught, not sanctioned 199 Warned 125 Referred to the bar 101 Reprimanded 86 Outcome unclear 56 Filing dismissed 37 Suspension 2 Upcoming sanction 1

Showing 111–120 of 199 incidents. Clear filters

Caught, not sanctioned ChatGPT
A Denver attorney accepted a 90-day suspension after an investigation found he used ChatGPT to help draft a motion containing fabrications.
Unnamed Colorado disciplinary case · Denver attorney · Colorado Supreme Court · CO
“like an idiot”
cronkitenews.azpbs.org ↗
The file →
  • Unnamed Colorado disciplinary case; a Denver attorney was sanctioned.
  • The attorney denied using AI, but the investigation found ChatGPT helped draft a motion with fabrications.
  • He received a 90-day suspension.
  • Colorado Supreme Court; Colorado.
  • The article gives no date beyond saying the case was recent; it quotes the attorney saying he hadn’t checked the work.
Caught, not sanctioned ChatGPT
Takefman cited the nonexistent case Hernandez v. Gilbert in two filings, but the court accepted his apology and did not sanction him.
Takefman matter · Earl Takefman · court not named on page · FL

Cases that don't exist

  • Hernandez v. Gilbert
nbcnews.com ↗
The file →
  • Earl Takefman was the pro se litigant in a Florida matter.
  • He used ChatGPT and cited the imaginary case Hernandez v. Gilbert in two filings.
  • The court forced him to explain why he should not be sanctioned, then imposed none.
  • Florida; court not named on the page; state jurisdiction.
  • The page says the judge admonished him and later accepted his apology.
Caught, not sanctioned
Kathleen Wilson was sanctioned in a separate bankruptcy case after admitting she submitted filings with AI hallucinations.
Kathleen Wilson · Kathleen Wilson · U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Louisiana · LA
mississippifreepress.org ↗
The file →
  • Kathleen Wilson was sanctioned in a separate case.
  • She admitted submitting filings with AI hallucinations.
  • The article does not state the sanction type or amount in that case.
  • U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Louisiana; Louisiana.
  • The page says the sanction happened back in March, but gives no full date or judge quote.
Caught, not sanctioned
One party cited authorities that the court said appeared to be AI 'hallucinations,' but no sanction is reported on the page.
Blinds to Go Inc. c. Blachley · Superior Court of Québec
“Justice Lukasz Granosik noted that the cited authorities appeared to be AI "hallucinations" with no basis in law.”
lazaruslegal.com ↗
The file →
  • Blinds to Go Inc. c. Blachley; one of the parties
  • Cited authorities appeared to be AI hallucinations
  • No sanction is stated on the page
  • Superior Court of Québec
  • 2025; Justice Lukasz Granosik made the observation
Caught, not sanctioned 2026-07-28
A filing in Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2143 v. Robibaro cited a fictitious case, and the Condominium Authority Tribunal of Ontario flagged the fake citation.
Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2143 v. Robibaro · Condominium Authority Tribunal of Ontario

Cases that don't exist

  • Waterloo Standard Condominium Corporation No. 697 v. Bugeja (Ontario Superior Court)
courtready.ca ↗
The file →
  • Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2143 v. Robibaro involved a fictitious citation.
  • The filing cited Waterloo Standard Condominium Corporation No. 697 v. Bugeja as real authority.
  • The tribunal flagged the citation as fictitious; no sanction is stated on the page.
  • Condominium Authority Tribunal of Ontario; Ontario.
  • 2026-07-28; the page gives the specific fake citation but no AI tool or judge quote.
Caught, not sanctioned 2026-07-21
Both sides filed briefs with factitious citations and misrepresentations of precedent, and the court struck the objections and related filings.
Evans v. Robertson (4) · E.D. Mich. · MI
“The Court ruled that even a single factitious citation violates its orders and justifies striking filings.”

Cases that don't exist

  • Mitan v. Campbell
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • Evans v. Robertson (4); both plaintiff and defendant filings were implicated
  • Briefs contained factitious citations and misrepresentations of precedent
  • The court struck the objections and related filings
  • E.D. Michigan, federal court
  • 2026-07-21; prior sanctions were reiterated and further violations were warned against
Caught, not sanctioned 2026-07-16
A DOJ lawyer filed a response citing a nonexistent Sixth Circuit case; Chief Judge Hala Y. Jarbou chastised the filing but imposed no sanctions.
Daghra v. Hinkley · Carolyn Almassian · U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan · MI
““It should be obvious that any attorney who uses AI must scrupulously review its work product to ensure that the cited cases exist and that the citations accurately and fairly represent the underlying case law,””

Cases that don't exist

  • Taylor v. Hott
news.bloomberglaw.com ↗
The file →
  • Daghra v. Hinkley; DOJ lawyer Carolyn Almassian was tied to the filing.
  • The response cited a nonexistent Sixth Circuit case and was said to likely use generative AI.
  • Chief Judge Hala Y. Jarbou did not sanction the government.
  • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
  • 7/16/26; the judge warned future filings must not include nonexistent case law.
Caught, not sanctioned 2026-07-08
The CPS filed submissions citing two non-existent legal cases in an extradition appeal, and the High Court accepted its apology without imposing sanctions.
Tobosaru v Court of Law Craiova, Romania [2026] EWHC 1720 (Admin) · Crown Prosecution Service · High Court
“It would be naive to assume that there will not be an increasing use of artificial intelligence in legal work in future; indeed, that may be both necessary and beneficial.”
newgatesolicitors.com ↗
The file →
  • Tobosaru v Court of Law Craiova, Romania [2026] EWHC 1720 (Admin); Crown Prosecution Service
  • CPS submissions in an extradition appeal cited two non-existent legal cases
  • No sanction was imposed; the court accepted the CPS’s apology and found no deliberate attempt to mislead
  • High Court
  • July 6, 2026; the false references were likely to have originated from generative artificial intelligence
Caught, not sanctioned Perplexity AI 2026-07-01
Counsel filed a brief with fictitious citations and a corrected brief that kept the fabricated legal synthesis; the court ordered the lawyer and firm to show cause.
Kevin Leiske et al. v. Robert Gregory Kidd et al. · Richard P. Rollo; Richards, Layton & Finger · Delaware Court of Chancery · DE
“"Counsel cannot discharge those obligations by relying on a paralegal, much less on an artificial intelligence program."”

Cases that don't exist

  • Perconti v. Thornton Oil Corp.
litigationsentinel.com ↗
The file →
  • In Kevin Leiske et al. v. Robert Gregory Kidd et al., a lawyer faced judicial scrutiny.
  • The lawyer submitted filings containing fabricated case law, false quotes, and misrepresented case law, which were attributed to an AI tool.
  • The court issued an order to show cause, indicating a potential sanction.
  • The incident occurred in the Delaware Chancery Court, a state court.
  • On July 1, 2026, the court acted after the use of Perplexity AI was identified as the source of the errors.
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.