legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this
86
Incidents tracked
30
Incidents in 2026
$86,945
In fines, where reported
5 of 86 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 49 of 86 incidents; the rest are undated or fall outside this window.

Blamed by name

ChatGPT 13 CoCounsel 1 Eve 1 Gemini 1 Lexis+ AI 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 51–60 of 86 incidents. Clear filters

Reprimanded 2026-03-30
Counsel filed an appellate brief with two non-existent cases and a false quotation; the Seventh Circuit admonished him but declined further sanctions.
Dec v. Mullin · Seventh Circuit
“Whatever AI’s future in litigation, our concern lies with trained lawyers failing to check the accuracy of legal citations and quotations in their filings.”
natlawreview.com ↗
The file →
  • Dec v. Mullin involved petitioner’s counsel.
  • He cited two non-existent cases and a false quotation in a brief.
  • The Seventh Circuit admonished him but imposed no further sanctions.
  • Seventh Circuit, federal appellate court.
  • March 30, 2026; the court said counsel failed to verify citations.
Reprimanded 2026-03-27
A Pennsylvania attorney filed a brief using AI-generated summaries of eight DEA adjudications, including one non-existent decision; the Third Circuit reprimanded him and imposed no monetary sanction.
McCarthy, P.A. v. United States DEA · Stephen McCarthy, P.A · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
“Attorney has harmed his credibility with this court”
oslaw.com ↗
The file →
  • McCarthy v. DEA involved a Pennsylvania attorney and the Third Circuit.
  • He relied on AI-generated summaries of eight DEA adjudications, and one did not exist.
  • The court issued only a reprimand and no monetary sanctions.
  • The court was the Third Circuit; the article gives no location beyond that.
  • The article says the court cited his belated corrections and sincere contrition, and did not clearly articulate AI expectations.
Reprimanded $1K Eve 2026-03-13
John A. Griffiths submitted filings with fabricated and misrepresented case law, resulting in a reprimand and an order to pay State Bar costs.
John A. Griffiths · John A. Griffiths · Arizona State Bar · AZ
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • John A. Griffiths was involved in an incident with the Arizona State Bar.
  • John A. Griffiths submitted filings containing fabricated and misrepresented case law using Eve.legal.
  • He received a reprimand and was ordered to pay State Bar costs and expenses of $1,200.
  • The incident occurred in the Arizona State Bar, a state jurisdiction.
  • The sanction was issued on March 13, 2026, due to AI-generated legal errors.
Reprimanded Lexis+ AI 2026-03-11
Three nonexistent cases, including a Supreme Court decision, were cited in an employment discrimination appeal, leading to public admonishment.
Bolden v. Baltimore Gas & Electric Co (In re: Eric Chibueze Nwaubani) · Eric Chibueze Nwaubani · Fourth Circuit Standing Panel on Attorney Discipline
“three nonexistent cases, each with materially different citations than those of the cases [the attorney] meant to cite”

Cases that don't exist

  • Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Jackson, 548 U.S. 629 (2006)
  • Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Glencore Ltd., 611 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
  • In re Acres Properties, Inc., 100 F.3d 1307 (7th Cir. 1996)
nortonrosefulbright.com ↗
The file →
  • In In re Nwaubani, an attorney was sanctioned.
  • Three nonexistent cases, including a fake Supreme Court decision, were cited in an appeal.
  • The sanction was a public admonishment for violating Fourth Circuit Local Rule 46(g)(1)(c).
  • The incident occurred in the U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Cir.
  • On 2026-03-11, the attorney denied using generative AI, resulting in disciplinary action.
Reprimanded 2026-03-05
Unregistered barrister submitted a skeleton argument with four AI-hallucinated case citations; the court ordered the judgment published naming her with no fine.
Re A, B, C, D (Extension of assessment; Use of AI: hallucinations) · Layla Parsons · Bournemouth Family Court
“Having heard from her, and read her submissions, I absolve her of any intention to mislead the court”
theinternetninja.com ↗
The file →
  • Re A, B, C, D involved unregistered barrister Layla Parsons
  • Submitted four erroneous or fabricated case authorities generated by an unnamed AI tool
  • Sanctioned by public naming in the published judgment with no fine or costs order
  • Decided in Bournemouth Family Court, England & Wales
  • Order issued 2026-03-05 by Recorder Howard, following Parsons's self-report to the BSB
Reprimanded 2026-02-24
The CBCA sanctioned a party for citing nonexistent authorities and quoting fabricated deposition testimony, issuing a formal admonishment.
Louis J. Blazy v. Department of State · Civilian Board of Contract Appeals
smithlaw.com ↗
The file →
  • Louis J. Blazy v. Department of State was sanctioned by the CBCA.
  • The party cited nonexistent authorities and fabricated deposition testimony.
  • The sanction was a formal admonishment.
  • Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, federal forum.
  • Feb. 24, 2026; the Board warned continued misconduct could lead to dismissal.
Reprimanded 2026-02-24
Gordon Rees received a reprimand after filing documents containing AI-hallucinated or fictitious legal citations.
Juan Villalovos-Gutierrez, et al. v. Gerard Van de Pol, et al. · Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani · U.S. Magistrate Judge Carolyn Delaney · CA
“Counsel shall not file or otherwise present to the court any documents which contain AI-hallucinated citations or fictitious or non-existent legal citations.”
completeaitraining.com ↗
The file →
  • Gordon Rees was reprimanded in Villalovos-Gutierrez v. Pol.
  • The court said the firm filed documents with AI-hallucinated or fictitious citations.
  • The sanction was a reprimand with no amount stated.
  • The order came from U.S. Magistrate Judge Carolyn Delaney.
  • Date was December 3, 2025; the page did not name an AI tool.
Reprimanded 2026-02-13
A lawyer misrepresented five case laws, resulting in an obligation to share the decision with the firm.
Nydia Rosario v. Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance Company · E.D. Pennsylvania · PA
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • A lawyer in Nydia Rosario v. Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance Company was sanctioned.
  • The AI misuse involved misrepresenting case law (5).
  • The sanction was an obligation to share the decision with the firm.
  • The court was the E.D. Pennsylvania, USA.
  • The incident occurred on 2026-02-13; the AI tool was implied.
Reprimanded ChatGPT 2026-02-10
The court publicly censured the attorney for filing an unreviewed, ChatGPT-drafted federal brief containing fabricated case citations.
Matter of Zareh · SC New York · NY
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • Matter of Zareh involving respondent attorney
  • Filed unreviewed brief drafted by ChatGPT with fake case citations and misstatements
  • Publicly censured via reciprocal discipline
  • New York Supreme Court
  • Disciplined February 10, 2026; follows prior admonishment in federal court
Reprimanded 2026-01-20
The judge punished four lawyers and canceled the civil trial after some of them filed AI-generated fake case citations.
Jessica B. v. Jones County School District · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi · MS
nytimes.com ↗
The file →
  • Jessica B. v. Jones County School District; all four lawyers on opposing sides
  • The page says both sides used artificial intelligence in the lawsuit and the judge punished them
  • The sanction was punishment/reprimand and the proceedings were canceled
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi; Mississippi
  • Dated 2026-01-20; no AI tool or fabricated citations are named on the page
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.