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 21–30 of 151 incidents involving ChatGPT. Clear filters

Caught, not sanctioned ChatGPT
Two lawyers filed a ChatGPT-generated brief with fabricated court opinions and quotes, and a judge sanctioned them.
Two lawyers sanctioned in 2023
miamidadebar.org ↗
The file →
  • Two lawyers were sanctioned in 2023.
  • They filed a brief generated by ChatGPT with fabricated court opinions and quotes.
  • The page says a judge sanctioned them, but gives no amount.
  • No court, judge, or location is identified on the page.
  • The page cites ChatGPT and warns it can ‘hallucinate’ and be wholly inaccurate.
Warned ChatGPT
A barrister misled the Tribunal by citing a fictitious Court of Appeal judgment generated by ChatGPT.
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) · Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
ein.org.uk ↗
The file →
  • Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) involved a barrister
  • The barrister cited a fictitious Court of Appeal judgment generated by ChatGPT
  • The Tribunal issued guidance and a stern warning
  • Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), England and Wales
  • Date not given; the page says this happened after ChatGPT-generated citations misled the Tribunal
Reprimanded ChatGPT
Three attorneys filed a motion with fabricated AI citations; a federal judge publicly reprimanded and disqualified them and referred them to the State Bar.
Alabama supervising attorney and others · federal judge · AL
“This was “an extreme dereliction of professional responsibility” and “lazy, convenient fictions” substituting for truth.”

Cases that don't exist

  • United States v. Baker
  • Kelley v. City of Birmingham
  • Greer v. Warden
vlex.com ↗
The file →
  • Alabama supervising attorney was one of three lawyers sanctioned over a motion with fake citations.
  • ChatGPT produced citations that were copied into the motion without verification.
  • The court publicly reprimanded and disqualified all three attorneys and referred them to the State Bar.
  • Federal court in Alabama.
  • Page says the judge called the conduct “recklessness in the extreme” and required review of 52 federal cases.
Fined $10K ChatGPT
An attorney filed AI-enhanced appellate briefs with fabricated citations and quotations; the California Court of Appeal sanctioned him $10,000 and referred him to the State Bar.
[Los Angeles attorney; case caption not named on page] · attorney in Los Angeles · California Court of Appeal · CA

Cases that don't exist

  • Schimmel v. Levin
  • Peake v. Underwood
vlex.com ↗
The file →
  • Los Angeles attorney was sanctioned after filing AI-enhanced appellate briefs.
  • ChatGPT generated fabricated citations and quotations that were filed without reading.
  • The court imposed a $10,000 sanction and referred him to the State Bar.
  • California Court of Appeal, California.
  • Page says the sanction was the highest fine ever issued by a California state court for AI misuse.
Caught, not sanctioned ChatGPT
Michael Long filed RTKL appeals and court papers with fabricated case citations, and the Borough challenged the filings in county court.
Michael Long · Michael Long · Northampton County Court of Common Pleas · PA

Cases that don't exist

  • Grove v. OOR
  • Pennsylvania State Education v. Commonwealth
  • IN RE S.S., 651 A.2d 174

+5 more

bathborough.org ↗
The file →
  • Michael Long was the requestor in the Bath Borough RTKL dispute.
  • He submitted legal filings and appeals containing fictitious or irrelevant citations.
  • The page reports no sanction order against him, only that the Borough challenged his filings.
  • The matter was in the Northampton County Court of Common Pleas in Pennsylvania.
  • The article says Long used AI and even bragged about using ChatGPT.
Caught, not sanctioned ChatGPT
A law school intern used ChatGPT for legal research, and an early-draft motion-to-dismiss opinion with fake quotes and misstated outcomes was withdrawn.
Julien Xavier Neals opinion · Julien Xavier Neals · U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey · NJ
“In doing so, the intern acted without authorization, without disclosure, and contrary to not only chambers policy but also the relevant law school policy.”
abajournal.com ↗
The file →
  • Julien Xavier Neals, U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
  • A law school intern used ChatGPT and the opinion misstated case outcomes and used fake quotes.
  • The opinion was withdrawn; no sanction is stated on the page.
  • District of New Jersey; federal court.
  • Neals said the intern acted without authorization, without disclosure, and contrary to chambers and law school policy.
Warned ChatGPT
Owoc filed a court motion with 11 AI-hallucinated citations and was sanctioned by the court.
Jack Owoc matter · Jack Owoc · California court · CA
futurism.com ↗
The file →
  • Jack Owoc was sanctioned in a California case.
  • He filed a motion with 11 AI-hallucinated citations to nonexistent cases.
  • The court ordered 10 hours of community service and future AI disclosure.
  • California court; state jurisdiction; location not further specified on the page.
  • The article says he admitted using generative AI and the sanction was for hallucinated citations.
Warned ChatGPT
An immigration barrister cited entirely fictitious or irrelevant cases in appeal grounds and the Upper Tribunal judge said he had likely used generative AI and tried to hide it.
Chowdhury Rahman · Chowdhury Rahman · Upper Tribunal
“The most obvious explanation is … that the grounds of appeal were drafted in whole or in part by generative artificial intelligence such as ChatGPT.”
theguardian.com ↗
The file →
  • Chowdhury Rahman was the immigration barrister in the Upper Tribunal case.
  • He cited cases that were described as entirely fictitious or wholly irrelevant.
  • The judge said Rahman likely used generative AI and considered reporting him to the Bar Standards Board.
  • Court: Upper Tribunal in the UK; the ruling was published on Tuesday.
  • Judge Mark Blundell ruled in September and said the submissions wasted the tribunal’s time.
Reprimanded ChatGPT
Two outside attorneys cited cases that ChatGPT hallucinated in an unrelated lawsuit and were publicly reprimanded and referred to licensing authorities.
Baltimore Central Booking & Intake Center conditions case · Matthew Reeves and William Lunsford · U.S. District Court · MD
thebanner.com ↗
The file →
  • Matthew Reeves and William Lunsford were the attorneys.
  • They cited cases that ChatGPT hallucinated in an unrelated lawsuit.
  • Judge Anna M. Manasco publicly reprimanded them and referred them to bar authorities.
  • U.S. District Court in Alabama.
  • The article says this happened this year; the page names ChatGPT and the referral.
Fined $10K ChatGPT
A California attorney was fined for filing a state court appeal with fake quotations generated by ChatGPT.
California attorney sanctioned for fake quotations generated by ChatGPT · CA
cybernews.com ↗
The file →
  • A California attorney was sanctioned for an AI-generated filing.
  • The attorney used fake quotations generated by ChatGPT in a state court appeal.
  • The court imposed a $10,000 fine.
  • The matter was in California state court.
  • The page says the fine was issued in September and calls it historic.
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.