legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this
151
Incidents tracked
26
Incidents in 2026
$542,786
In fines, where reported
50 of 151 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 60 of 151 incidents; the rest are undated or fall outside this window.

Blamed by name

ChatGPT 151 Claude 9 CoCounsel 8 Copilot 8 Gemini 8 Lexis+ AI 6 AI-assisted legal software 4 Westlaw Precision 4 ChatGPT-4o 2 ChatOn 2 Eve 2 Google AI 2 LEAP 2 Perplexity AI 2 AI Overviews 1 Archie 1 Centient AI 1 ChatGPT-4 1 ClearBrief 1 CoCounsel, Westlaw Precision, Google Gem 1 Descrybe.ai 1 First Drafts 1 GPT-3.5 1 Ghostwriter Legal 1 Google Scholar 1 Grammarly 1 Grok 1 Irys 1 Legal Genius 1 LegalAI 1 MX2.law 1 OpenCase 1 Strongsuit 1 vLex Fastcase 1

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

Hall of Shame

All Fined 53 Caught, not sanctioned 32 Warned 19 Referred to the bar 17 Reprimanded 13 Filing dismissed 10 Outcome unclear 6 Suspension 1

Showing 121–130 of 151 incidents involving ChatGPT. Clear filters

Referred to the bar ChatGPT 2025-08-14
An Arizona federal judge imposed sanctions including revocation of pro hac vice status and mandatory state bar notification for submitting fabricated case citations.
Mavy v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · Maren Ann-Miller Bam · U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona · AZ
“The Court does not take this action lightly.”

Cases that don't exist

  • Brown v. Colvin
  • Wofford v. Berryhill
  • Hobbs v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
cronkitenews.azpbs.org ↗
The file →
  • Mavy v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration; attorney Maren Ann-Miller Bam was sanctioned.
  • Her Social Security appeal brief included AI-generated fabricated, misleading, or unsupported citations.
  • Judge Alison Bachus sanctioned her and ordered notice to the three judges named in the fake opinions.
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona; federal court in Arizona.
  • Aug. 14, 2025; the article says 12 of 19 cited cases were fake and mentions ChatGPT-generated hallucinations.
Referred to the bar ChatGPT 2025-08-12
A barrister filed ChatGPT-drafted grounds with a fictitious Court of Appeal authority and was found to have attempted to mislead the tribunal and referred to the BSB.
MS (Bangladesh) · Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
“attempted to mislead”
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • MS (professional conduct: AI generated documents) is the named matter.
  • ChatGPT-drafted grounds cited a fictitious Court of Appeal authority.
  • The barrister was referred to the Bar Standards Board.
  • The court was the Upper Tribunal (IAC).
  • Promulgated 12 August 2025; the barrister produced further unverified AI output after a short adjournment.
Caught, not sanctioned ChatGPT 2025-08-08
Former Maine lawyer Seth Carey was denied law license reinstatement after submitting a motion drafted with ChatGPT containing unchecked, erroneous case citations.
Seth Carey · Seth Carey · Penobscot County Superior Court · ME
“This conduct is incredibly striking and negatively reflects on multiple criteria for reinstatement.”
bangordailynews.com ↗
The file →
  • Seth Carey sought reinstatement of his suspended Maine law license.
  • Carey used ChatGPT to write a motion and failed to verify the AI-generated citations.
  • Judge Ann Murray denied his reinstatement request without imposing monetary sanctions.
  • The decision was issued in Penobscot County Superior Court, Maine.
  • The court ruled on August 8 after finding Carey failed to show progress or competence.
Filing dismissed $86K ChatGPT 2025-08-01
Lawyer James Martin Paul filed briefs with hallucinated AI citations in ByoPlanet cases; the court dismissed the federal matters, awarded fees, and referred him to the Florida Bar.
ByoPlanet International v. Johansson and Gilstrap · James Martin Paul · Southern District of Florida · FL
“When he argued the fine was too high, the court shot back that caving to his arguments “would only benefit serial hallucinators.””
relativity.com ↗
The file →
  • ByoPlanet Int’l, LLC v. Johansson and related matters; attorney James Martin Paul
  • Paul used hallucinated citations across eight matters and even filed fabricated quotations after being put on notice
  • Judge Leibowitz dismissed the four federal matters without prejudice and without leave to amend, awarded fees and costs, and referred Paul to the Florida Bar
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Florida
  • July 17, 2025; Paul told the court he and his paralegal used ChatGPT
Referred to the bar $100K ChatGPT 2025-07-23
Attorneys submitted five ChatGPT-fabricated citations in discovery motions, resulting in public reprimand, disqualification from the case, and state bar referral.
Frankie Johnson v. Jefferson S. Dunn et al. · William Cranford, Matthew Reeves, and William Lunsford · United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama · AL
“"failing to prevent AI hallucinations in legal filings"”
dailyjournal.com ↗
The file →
  • Johnson v. Dunn involved attorneys William Cranford, Matthew Reeves, and William Lunsford.
  • Reeves inserted 5 fabricated citations generated by ChatGPT into two discovery motions without verifying them.
  • The court ordered a public reprimand, disqualification from the case, and referral to the state bar.
  • The case was decided in the Northern District of Alabama.
  • The sanction order was issued on July 23, 2025, finding the conduct tantamount to subjective bad faith.
Fined $6K ChatGPT 2025-07-18
Thomas Nield used ChatGPT to research a Chapter 13 issue and filed briefs with nonexistent cases and quotes; Judge Michael Slade fined him $5,500.
In re Marla C. Martin · Thomas Nield · U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois · IL
“The next lawyer who does the same thing is warned that he or she will likely see a more significant penalty.”
news.bloomberglaw.com ↗
The file →
  • Thomas Nield, a former Semrad Law Firm bankruptcy attorney, was sanctioned in Illinois.
  • He used ChatGPT and filed documents with hallucinated cases and quotes.
  • Judge Michael Slade imposed a $5,500 fine.
  • The sanction came from the Illinois bankruptcy court.
  • The article says he used ChatGPT for an ancillary issue in a Chapter 13 case and was terminated in September.
Referred to the bar ChatGPT 2025-06-06
The claimant's solicitor relied on 45 client-provided case citations, 18 fictitious, and the court referred him to the SRA.
Al-Haroun v. Qatar National Bank · Abid Hussain; Primus Solicitors · High Court of Justice, Divisional Court
“a matter of the utmost seriousness”
global.lockton.com ↗
The file →
  • Hamad Al-Haroun v Qatar National Bank QPSC and QNB Capital LLC; Abid Hussain of Primus Solicitors
  • Witness statements contained eighteen non-existent case authorities and misquoted genuine ones
  • The court did not initiate contempt proceedings and said referral to the regulator was more appropriate
  • Divisional Court, UK; the article says the decision was published on 6 June 2025
  • Dias J called it "a matter of the utmost seriousness" and said counsel failed to check the information provided by the client
Fined $6K ChatGPT 2025-05-28
Attorney Rafael Ramirez was sanctioned $6,000 and subsequently resigned after submitting briefs containing fake AI-generated citations on three occasions.
Mid Central Operating Engineers Health & Welfare Fund v. HoosierVac LLC · Rafael Ramirez · U.S. Magistrate Judge Mark Dinsmore · IN
inkfreenews.com ↗
The file →
  • Mid Central Operating Engineers v. HoosierVac involving an attorney.
  • Submitted three court briefs relying on non-existent citations from generative AI.
  • Fined $6,000 (reduced from a recommended $15,000).
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.
  • Dated May 28, 2025; involved repeated filing of fake authority across multiple submissions.
Caught, not sanctioned ChatGPT 2025-05-20
Senior lawyer Jisuh Lee showed cause over fake precedent cases in a factum, but she apologized and purged her contempt before the hearing continued.
Ko v Li · Jisuh Lee · Ontario Superior Court of Justice
“to bring home to all lawyers the need to check and not to trust factums [sic] generated by AI or by others”
claytonrice.com ↗
The file →
  • Ko v Li involved senior lawyer Jisuh Lee.
  • Her factum contained fake precedent court cases prepared using ChatGPT.
  • She purged her contempt, so no sanction was imposed.
  • Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
  • 2025-05-20; Justice F.L. Myers said lawyers must check factums generated by AI.
Filing dismissed ChatGPT 2025-04-01
An applicant repeatedly used the term "subornation of perjury," which Judge David Nolan said sounded like AI and denied the judicial review appeal.
Judicial review appeal in Ireland · High Court
“This sounds like something that derived from an artificial intelligence source,”
businessplus.ie ↗
The file →
  • An unnamed applicant was before Judge David Nolan.
  • The applicant repeatedly used a phrase the judge thought came from AI.
  • Judge Nolan denied the judicial review appeal.
  • This happened in the High Court in Ireland.
  • About four months after Dec. 2024; Nolan said it had the hallmarks of ChatGPT or a similar tool.
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.