legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this
858
Incidents tracked
265
Incidents in 2026
$2,417,608
In fines, where reported
214 of 858 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 450 of 858 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 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
Fined ChatGPT
Steven A. Schwartz filed a brief with AI-fabricated cases and quotations, and the court sanctioned the filing.
In re Schwartz · Steven A. Schwartz · federal court
prinz-lawfirm.com ↗
The file →
  • In re Schwartz involved Steven A. Schwartz and AI-fabricated citations.
  • He submitted a brief with made-up cases and quotations.
  • The court sanctioned the filing with a monetary fine.
  • The page says courts in Wyoming, California, Texas, and Pennsylvania have sanctioned similar conduct.
  • It identifies ChatGPT as one of the AI tools that can hallucinate citations.
Referred to the bar
A licensed attorney's similar AI misuse would have ended in sanctions, but the attorney had already been referred to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.
In re R. L. v. Anezka · Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District · IL
tresslerllp.com ↗
The file →
  • In re R. L. v. Anezka was cited as another AI-citation incident.
  • The article says similar conduct by a licensed attorney would have ended in sanctions.
  • The attorney had already been referred to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.
  • Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District; state court in Illinois.
  • The page gives no exact sanction date; it says the referral had already happened.
Warned
A litigant in person used AI in a skeleton argument with erroneous citations; the Recorder rejected the misleading references and considered publication and naming.
Re A, B, C, D [2026] EWFC 71 · [LIP] · Family Court
“All parties – represented and unrepresented – owe a duty to the court to ensure that cases cited in legal argument are genuine and provide authority for the proposition advanced.”
naturalandartificiallaw.com ↗
The file →
  • Re A, B, C, D [2026] EWFC 71 and [LIP]
  • Used an AI tool to prepare a skeleton argument containing erroneous citations
  • No monetary sanction; the Recorder considered publication and naming
  • Family Court, England and Wales
  • Recorder said parties owe a duty to ensure cited cases are genuine
Caught, not sanctioned
Thomas Gregory Sylvester filed a brief with AI-fabricated legal citations, and the Fifth Circuit discussed the incident and reaffirmed existing rules govern AI misuse.
In re: Thomas Gregory Sylvester · Thomas Gregory Sylvester · U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
jdsupra.com ↗
The file →
  • In re: Thomas Gregory Sylvester; Thomas Gregory Sylvester
  • He filed a brief containing AI-fabricated legal citations
  • No sanction amount is stated; the court said existing rules already govern AI misuse
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
  • The article says the Fifth Circuit reaffirmed no bespoke AI rule is needed
Caught, not sanctioned
A Victorian judge probed Ahmed Dib’s firm after a solicitor filed documents with made-up quotes, non-existent cases and apparent AI hallucinations.
Ahmed Dib’s firm probe · Ahmed Dib · Victorian judge · VIC
afr.com ↗
The file →
  • Ahmed Dib’s firm was probed over the filing.
  • A solicitor allegedly laid documents before the court with made-up quotes and non-existent cases.
  • The article reports a judicial probe, not a stated sanction.
  • The court was in Victoria, Australia.
  • Published Mar. 22, 2026; the piece says the documents showed extensive artificial intelligence hallucinations.
Caught, not sanctioned
Counsel for consumers said a generative AI tool added a hallucinated citation to a brief, which a Boies Schiller associate missed while checking citations.
Amazon supplement labeling lawsuit · Boies Schiller · U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington · WA
law360.com ↗
The file →
  • Amazon supplement labeling lawsuit against Amazon.com Inc.; Boies Schiller was involved.
  • A generative AI tool used to 'harmonize' drafts introduced an AI-hallucinated citation.
  • No sanction is stated on the page; the issue was being explained to the court.
  • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
  • March 19, 2026 article; a fifth-year Boies Schiller associate missed the error.
Fined $66K
Arnold Porter won a ruling for more than $66,000 in attorneys’ fees after the plaintiff filed duplicative motions and fake case citations using AI.
ICANN and Verisign Inc. v. [Chinese plaintiff] · Arnold Porter Kaye Scholer · U.S. District Court for the Central District of California · CA
“bad faith”
news.bloomberglaw.com ↗
The file →
  • Arnold Porter Kaye Scholer obtained the fee award in the ICANN/Verisign dispute.
  • The plaintiff repeatedly filed AI-generated fake case citations and duplicative motions.
  • The court awarded more than $66,000 in attorneys’ fees.
  • U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, California.
  • December; the judge said the plaintiff kept filing fake citations even after apologizing.
Fined $1K
The Tenth Circuit fined a Maryland attorney $1,000 and referred the matter after a brief cited nonexistent cases generated with AI.
Maryland attorney referred to disciplinary authorities by the Tenth Circuit · US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
carry.com ↗
The file →
  • A Maryland attorney was sanctioned by the Tenth Circuit.
  • She acknowledged using generative AI to prepare a brief with nonexistent cases.
  • The court imposed a $1,000 fine and referred the matter to disciplinary authorities.
  • US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, federal.
  • March 23, 2026 article; the page does not name the AI tool used.

Showing 241–250 of 858.

Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.