legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this
251
Incidents tracked
81
Incidents in 2026
$1,813,310
In fines, where reported
186 of 251 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 139 of 251 incidents; the rest are undated or fall outside this window.

Blamed by name

ChatGPT 53 Claude 4 Lexis+ AI 4 Westlaw Precision 4 CoCounsel 3 Copilot 2 AI-assisted legal software 1 Archie 1 ChatOn 1 ClearBrief 1 CoCounsel, Westlaw Precision, Google Gem 1 Descrybe.ai 1 First Drafts 1 Gemini 1 Ghostwriter Legal 1 Google AI 1 Google Scholar 1 Grok 1 Irys 1 vLex Fastcase 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 161–170 of 251 incidents. Clear filters

Fined $10K 2026-03-06
Two lawyers cited two fictitious AI-generated cases in closing submissions and were ordered to pay S$5,000 each in personal costs.
Tan Hai Peng Micheal v Tan Cheong Joo and another and other matters · Mr Goh Peck San · General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore
“It is again re-emphasised in this judgment.”
elitigation.sg ↗
The file →
  • Tan Thuan Teck estate suit; Mr Goh Peck San and Mr Amarjit Singh Sidhu
  • Closing submissions cited two fictitious AI-generated cases
  • Ordered to pay S$5,000 each in personal costs (S$10,000 total)
  • Singapore High Court, Singapore
  • 2026-03-06; Justice S Mohan said counsel must verify all authorities
Fined $1K ChatGPT 2026-02-24
An attorney filed an error-filled brief drafted with ChatGPT and Westlaw Precision AI that cited numerous hallucinated cases, and Judge Brandon Long imposed a $1,000 sanction.
Woodward Harbor LLC v. City of Mandeville, et al. · Eastern District of Louisiana · LA
mblb.com ↗
The file →
  • Woodward Harbor LLC v. City of Mandeville, et al.; one attorney was sanctioned.
  • He submitted a brief drafted with ChatGPT and Westlaw Precision AI containing hallucinated cases.
  • The court imposed a $1,000 sanction.
  • Eastern District of Louisiana; federal; Louisiana.
  • 2026-02-24; the brief included at least 11 citations that were made up, misquoted, or misused.
Fined $2K 2026-02-18
Sixteen fabricated quotations and five misrepresentations were found in a reply brief, with the court finding it likely AI also wrote the show-cause response.
Fletcher v. Experian Information Solutions & Bridgecrest Credit Company · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
“Had Hersh accepted responsibility and been more forthcoming, it is likely that the court would have imposed lesser sanctions.”
nortonrosefulbright.com ↗
The file →
  • In Fletcher v. Experian, an attorney was sanctioned.
  • Sixteen fabricated quotations and five misrepresentations were found in a reply brief.
  • The sanction was $2,500 payable to the court.
  • The incident occurred in the U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Cir., with Chief Judge Elrod.
  • On 2026-02-18, the court found generative AI likely drafted the brief, and noted candour would have led to a lesser sanction.
Fined 2026-02-18
The Fifth Circuit sanctioned a Texas attorney for a brief drafted with generative AI that contained fabricated quotations and assertions.
Jennifer Walker Elrod · U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · TX
“The Fifth Circuit on Wednesday sanctioned a Texas attorney for using generative artificial intelligence to draft a brief that was "riddled with fabricated quotations and assertions," while rebuking the attorney for not being more forthcoming about her use of the technology and her failure to check its accuracy.”
law360.com ↗
The file →
  • A Texas attorney was sanctioned in the Fifth Circuit.
  • Her AI-drafted brief contained fabricated quotations and assertions.
  • The court sanctioned her, but the article gives no amount.
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; Texas.
  • Feb. 18, 2026; the article says she used generative AI and failed to check accuracy.
Fined $2K 2026-02-17
The Fifth Circuit sanctioned Heather Hersh for filing an AI-generated brief with 21 fictional case citations and other errors.
In re Heather Hersh · Heather Hersh of FCRA attorneys · U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
““Regrettably, despite numerous news stories, CLE presentations, scholarly articles, and judicial entreaties, AI-hallucinated case citations have increasingly become an even greater problem in our courts, and the problem shows no sign of abating,””
bestlawfirms.com ↗
The file →
  • Heather Hersh of FCRA attorneys was sanctioned by the Fifth Circuit.
  • She filed an AI-generated brief containing 21 fictional case citations and other errors.
  • The court ordered a $2,500 sanction.
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; federal appellate court.
  • Feb. 17, 2026; the opinion said AI-hallucinated citations are getting worse and blamed inadequate review.
Fined $1 2026-02-13
A lawyer submitted ten fabricated case laws and one misrepresented case law, and two misrepresented legal norms, resulting in a temeridad declaration, a monetary fine, and a bar referral.
AC739-2026 · CSJ
“Trasladar un texto generado por IA sin contraste alguno constituye ceguera voluntaria (dolo).”
haqq.ai ↗
The file →
  • A lawyer in AC739-2026 was sanctioned.
  • The AI misuse involved fabricated case law (10), misrepresented case law (1), and misrepresented legal norms (2).
  • The sanction was a temeridad declaration, a monetary fine of $1 USD, and a bar referral.
  • The court was the CSJ in Colombia.
  • The incident occurred on 2026-02-13; the AI tool was unidentified.
Fined $1 2026-02-12
A lawyer submitted eleven fabricated case laws and four misrepresented case laws; the Magistrate recommended a monetary sanction and a bar referral.
Virgil v. Experian Information Solutions, et al. · S.D. Indiana · IN
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • A lawyer in Virgil v. Experian Information Solutions, et al. was sanctioned.
  • The AI misuse involved fabricated case law (11) and misrepresented case law (4).
  • The sanction was a recommended monetary fine of $1 USD and a bar referral.
  • The court was the S.D. Indiana, USA.
  • The incident occurred on 2026-02-12; the AI tool was implied.
Fined 2026-02-12
A lawyer submitted one fabricated case law, resulting in a monetary sanction of 2500 ILS.
Ploni v. Log-On Software Ltd. et al. · Regional Labor Court of Tel Aviv-Jaffa
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • A lawyer in Ploni v. Log-On Software Ltd. et al. was sanctioned.
  • The AI misuse involved fabricated case law (1).
  • The sanction was a monetary fine of 2500 ILS.
  • The court was the Regional Labor Court of Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Israel.
  • The incident occurred on 2026-02-12; the AI tool was implied.
Fined $12K ChatGPT 2026-02-02
Lawyers filed briefs with ChatGPT-hallucinated citations and quotations, and Judge Julie A. Robinson publicly admonished and sanctioned them.
Lexos Media IP, LLC v. Overstock.com, Inc. · Sandeep Seth; Kenneth Kula; Christopher Joe; Michael Doell; David Cooper · D. Kan. · KS
“the Rule 11 duty is “nondelegable.””
yahoo.com ↗
The file →
  • Attorneys Sandeep Seth, Kenneth P. Kula, Christopher M. Joe, and David R. Cooper sanctioned
  • Submitted nonexistent citations, fabricated quotations, and misrepresented decisions using ChatGPT
  • Sandeep Seth fined $5,000; Kula and Joe fined $3,000 each; Cooper fined $1,000 (total $12,000)
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas under Judge Julie A. Robinson
  • Order issued February 2, 2026; Seth had his permission to appear revoked
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.