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 241–250 of 251 incidents. Clear filters

Fined $3K 2025-01-01
Lawyers at Morgan & Morgan were sanctioned, and the drafting attorney was fined $3,000 while his temporary bar admission was revoked.
Morgan & Morgan · Morgan & Morgan
developmentcorporate.com ↗
The file →
  • Morgan & Morgan lawyers were sanctioned in 2025.
  • The drafting attorney was fined $3,000 and had his temporary bar admission revoked.
  • The sanction was a monetary fine plus revocation of temporary admission.
  • Court and jurisdiction are not named on the page.
  • 2025; the page identifies Morgan & Morgan as the largest personal injury firm in the U.S.
Fined $2K ChatGPT 2024-11-04
Judge Fred W. Slaughter imposed $2,000 in sanctions on William Becker Jr. for filing a motion with alleged non-existent case citations and misrepresentations of existing law.
William Becker Jr. · William Becker Jr · US District Court for the Central District of California · CA
“Sanctions were warranted against Becker for “his failure to verify the validity of the AI-generated material, and submitting the AI-tainted Motion to the court,” the judge said.”
news.bloomberglaw.com ↗
The file →
  • William Becker Jr. was sanctioned in the Chris Kluwe-related case.
  • He filed a motion with AI-hallucinated/non-existent citations and misrepresented existing case law.
  • The court imposed $2,000 in sanctions.
  • US District Court for the Central District of California; Judge Fred W. Slaughter.
  • Nov. 4 order; the page says the motion was AI-tainted and Becker was told to show cause.
Fined $2K Claude 2024-11-01
Brandon Monk filed a wrongful-termination brief with fake cases and AI-generated quotes and was fined $2,000 plus ordered to take an AI legal course.
Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. · Brandon Monk · U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas · TX
legal.thomsonreuters.com ↗
The file →
  • Brandon Monk and Monk Law Firm were sanctioned.
  • He submitted a filing with fake cases and AI-generated quotes in a Goodyear wrongful-termination suit.
  • The court fined him $2,000 and ordered an AI legal course.
  • A Texas federal judge imposed the sanction.
  • November 2024; Judge Marcia Crone had ordered him to explain why he should not face sanctions.
Fined ChatGPT 2024-02-20
A lawyer submitted filings with AI-generated case citations; the BC Supreme Court declined special costs but held her personally liable for other costs.
Zhang v. Chen · counsel in Zhang v. Chen · Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada · BC
“Citing fake cases in court filings and other materials handed up to the court is an abuse of process and is tantamount to making a false statement … Unchecked, it can lead to a miscarriage of justice.”
corp-intl.com ↗
The file →
  • In Zhang v. Chen, counsel faced sanctions.
  • Two fabricated cases were cited in a parenting time application, with delayed disclosure.
  • Special costs were refused, but costs were ordered personally against counsel.
  • The incident occurred in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, with Justice Masuhara.
  • On 2024-02-20, ChatGPT was admitted as the source, and counsel was ordered to review other files.
Fined $2K ChatGPT 2024-02-12
Plaintiff's counsel filed opposition memoranda containing four fictitious AI-generated citations and was fined $2,000 under Rule 11.
Smith v. Farwell · Suffolk Superior Court · MA
“two disturbing developments that are adversely affecting the practice of law”
klemchuk.com ↗
The file →
  • Smith v. Farwell involved plaintiff's counsel filing fictitious citations.
  • Counsel filed four memoranda with three containing four fake cases from an AI tool.
  • Court fined counsel $2,000 for Rule 11 violations.
  • Norfolk Superior Court, Massachusetts, presided over by Judge Brian A. Davis.
  • Date: February 2024; judge noted a defense based on ignorance will be less credible.
Fined $10K ChatGPT 2023-06-30
Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP submitted a brief with hallucinated citations, and the court sanctioned the firm and counsel.
In re: CFI Delegated Shareholder Litigation · Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP · Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware · DE
““The use of ChatGPT was not disclosed to the Court.””

Cases that don't exist

  • Hsu v. Teco Energy, Inc., 2018 WL 5115675
  • Morris v. 7-Eleven, Inc., 2015 WL 7293045
podcasts.apple.com ↗
The file →
  • In re: CFI Delegated Shareholder Litigation against Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP
  • A filing included hallucinated citations generated with ChatGPT
  • The court imposed a $10,000 monetary sanction
  • Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Delaware
  • The order noted the use of ChatGPT was not disclosed to the court
Fined $5K ChatGPT 2023-06-22
Counsel cited six nonexistent, ChatGPT-generated cases in an opposition brief and then filed fabricated copies of the opinions when challenged.
Mata v. Avianca · Steven Schwartz, Peter LoDuca, and their firm · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York · NY
“Judge P. Kevin Castel sanctioned Schwartz, co-counsel Peter LoDuca, and their firm $5,000.”

Cases that don't exist

  • Miller v. DLA Piper LLP (US), 923 F.3d 1297
  • Zicherman v. Korean Air Lines Co., 516 U.S. 217
  • Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co. Ltd., 925 F.3d 1339

+3 more

note.com ↗
The file →
  • In Mata v. Avianca, Inc., two attorneys and their firm were sanctioned.
  • They cited six nonexistent, ChatGPT-generated cases and filed fabricated opinions.
  • The sanction was a $5,000 penalty, jointly and severally.
  • The incident occurred in the S.D.N.Y. federal court.
  • On 2023-06-22, ChatGPT was identified as the AI tool used, leading to letters to the client and falsely named judges.
Fined ChatGPT 2023-06-22
A New York lawyer was sanctioned after filing briefs with fake court cases generated by ChatGPT.
In re Cathleen Siebrecht · Cathleen Siebrecht · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York · NY
smallwarsjournal.com ↗
The file →
  • In re Cathleen Siebrecht involved Cathleen Siebrecht, a New York lawyer.
  • She filed briefs citing fake court cases produced by ChatGPT.
  • The court sanctioned her, but the article gives no amount.
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
  • The page says this happened in 2023 and ties the citations to a ChatGPT hallucination.
Fined $5K 2023-06-08
Cathleen Siebrecht filed documents with fictitious case law and legal arguments, and Judge P. Kevin Castel fined the lawyers involved $5,000.
In re Cathleen Siebrecht · Cathleen Siebrecht · U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico · NM
san.com ↗
The file →
  • In re Cathleen Siebrecht; Cathleen Siebrecht was sanctioned.
  • She submitted documents containing fictitious case law and legal arguments.
  • The court imposed a $5,000 fine.
  • U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, federal court in New Mexico.
  • 2023-06-08; the page says this was an early high-profile AI-misuse case.
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.