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 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 126 Referred to the bar 98 Reprimanded 85 Outcome unclear 53 Filing dismissed 36 Suspension 2 Upcoming sanction 1

Showing 21–30 of 251 incidents. Clear filters

Fined
Two lawyers representing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell were fined for filing court documents containing more than two dozen AI-hallucinated case citations.
Mike Lindell defamation lawsuit · U.S. District Court
socialistproject.ca ↗
The file →
  • Two lawyers representing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell were sanctioned.
  • The attorneys filed court documents that included over two dozen hallucinated cases.
  • The court imposed a monetary fine for violating federal rules requiring well-grounded legal claims.
  • The decision was issued by Judge Nina Y. Wang in federal court.
  • The judge found that fake AI-generated cases fail the requirement that court claims be well-grounded in law.
Fined $14K 2026-08-20
A lawyer voluntarily repaid $14,500 in adverse costs after submitting court filings containing an AI-fabricated case citation.
Full Standard Properties, LLC v. SJ 6070, LLC · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · CA
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • Full Standard Properties v. SJ 6070 involved a lawyer who submitted an AI-fabricated case citation.
  • Counsel included a fabricated case law citation in court filings.
  • The lawyer voluntarily agreed to pay $14,500 in adverse costs.
  • The proceeding took place in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
  • The outcome was recorded on August 20, 2026.
Fined $5K
The court imposed $5,000 in sanctions against an attorney for submitting 23 fabricated authorities across five filings.
Deutsche Bank v. LeTennier · New York Appellate Division · NY
mondaq.com ↗
The file →
  • In Deutsche Bank v. LeTennier, an attorney was sanctioned for submitting AI-fabricated authorities.
  • The filings contained 23 fabricated authorities across five separate submissions.
  • The court imposed $5,000 in monetary sanctions.
  • The ruling was issued by the New York Appellate Division.
  • The court applied a multi-factor framework to evaluate sanctions for AI-generated fabrications.
Fined $3K ChatGPT 2026-08-18
The court excluded an expert report after previously fining plaintiff's counsel $3,000 for relying on dozens of ChatGPT and Claude AI-fabricated citations.
Joann LeDoux v. Outliers, Inc. · Jocelyn Stewart · U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington · WA
“The court concluded that the expert’s “multiple hallucinated citations ‘shatter … his credibility with this Court.’””
nwsidebar.wsba.org ↗
The file →
  • LeDoux v. Outliers, Inc. involved unnamed plaintiff's counsel.
  • Counsel used ChatGPT and Claude to build a citation table containing dozens of inaccurate citations across five filings.
  • The court fined counsel $3,000 under Rule 11 and later excluded an expert's report entirely.
  • The case was heard in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington (Tacoma).
  • Judge Tiffany M. Cartwright excluded the expert report on August 18, 2026, following the July fine.
Fined 2026-08-13
A Brazilian attorney used AI without review to cite fake case law, resulting in a 2% procedural fine for bad-faith litigation and a bar referral.
Apelação Cível nº 1032884-04.2025.8.26.0224 · TJ San Paulo
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • Apelação Cível nº 1032884-04.2025.8.26.0224 involves an unnamed lawyer sanctioned for bad-faith litigation.
  • The attorney used an unreviewed AI tool to cite non-existent jurisprudential precedents.
  • The court imposed a 2% procedural fine (1 BRL) and referred the lawyer to the OAB.
  • TJ San Paulo, Brazil.
  • Order issued August 13, 2026; court noted AI fabrications violate duties of probity and good faith.
Fined $2K ChatGPT
Cathleen Siebrecht filed a brief with AI-hallucinated citations and the court sanctioned her.
In re Cathleen Siebrecht · Cathleen Siebrecht · U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida · FL
“I absolve the mother of any intention to mislead the court.”

Cases that don't exist

  • Johnson v. City of Detroit, 2024 WL 1234567
peaceforasia.ch ↗
The file →
  • In re Cathleen Siebrecht; attorney Cathleen Siebrecht was sanctioned.
  • She filed a brief containing AI-hallucinated citations.
  • The court imposed a $2,500 monetary fine.
  • U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida; federal court in Florida.
  • Date not given on the page; the page links this as an AI hallucination case.
Fined $5K ChatGPT
Jan Tomasik and Daniel Mann filed a brief with bogus citations generated by ChatGPT, and Judge Hardy ordered them removed, referred to the Nevada bar, and fined.
Uprise · Jan Tomasik; Daniel Mann; Cozen O’Connor · Washoe County, Nev., District Court · NV
“This is larger than any of us,”
lawnext.com ↗
The file →
  • Uprise; Jan Tomasik, Daniel Mann, and Cozen O’Connor
  • They filed a brief with bogus legal references generated by ChatGPT.
  • Judge Hardy ordered removal, bar referral, and $2,500 fines each ($5,000 total), then suspended them.
  • Washoe County, Nevada, District Court in Washoe County, Nev.
  • Last May; Hardy said he wanted system improvement and redemption.
Fined $10K ChatGPT
A California attorney filed ChatGPT-generated fake case quotes and citations, and the state appeals court fined the lawyer $10,000.
California attorney sanctioned for ChatGPT-generated fake case quotes and citations · state appeals court · CA
ai.plainenglish.io ↗
The file →
  • A California attorney was sanctioned for ChatGPT-fabricated case quotes.
  • The lawyer submitted 21 of 23 quotes that ChatGPT had completely fabricated.
  • The court fined the lawyer $10,000.
  • The sanction came from a state appeals court in California.
  • The page names ChatGPT as the source of the fake citations.
Fined $5K
The court sanctioned attorneys $2,500 each and imposed a six-month suspension for AI-fabricated citations after repeated denials of AI use.
Ninth Circuit's Precedential AI-Hallucination Sanctions · Ninth Circuit
github.com ↗
The file →
  • Ninth Circuit's Precedential AI-Hallucination Sanctions
  • Attorneys used AI-fabricated citations and one denied AI use three times before admitting it.
  • The court imposed $2,500 each plus a six-month suspension, totaling $5,000.
  • The page identifies the court as the Ninth Circuit.
  • The order is described as a published appellate order.
Fined
Attorneys were fined after filings in the FIFA case contained inaccurate or nonexistent citations that suggested AI misuse.
FIFA case
“but the sheer number of inaccurate or nonexistent citations suggests otherwise.”
reuters.com ↗
The file →
  • FIFA case; attorneys unnamed on the page
  • Filings contained inaccurate or nonexistent citations
  • Court imposed a fine, but the amount is not stated
  • Court and location are not stated on the page
  • Attorneys denied using AI; judge said the citations suggested otherwise
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.