legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this
857
Incidents tracked
266
Incidents in 2026
$2,397,608
In fines, where reported
212 of 857 report an amount

The curve

Incidents per month

Last 18 months of published incidents, by the date of the court's order.

May 2025 Oct 2026

Charting 447 of 857 incidents; the rest are undated or fall outside this window.

Blamed by name

ChatGPT 147 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 249 Caught, not sanctioned 198 Warned 124 Referred to the bar 101 Reprimanded 86 Outcome unclear 57 Filing dismissed 39 Suspension 2 Upcoming sanction 1
Referred to the bar Claude 2025-08-15
A lawyer filed submissions citing four non-existent cases based on Claude AI research, and Judge Gerrard ordered personal costs and referred the conduct.
JNE24 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 · Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2)
“Legal principles are not simply slogans which can be affixed to submissions without context or analysis.”
mpslaw.com.au ↗
The file →
  • JNE24 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship involved a lawyer whose submissions cited four cases.
  • The citations came from Claude AI research and the cases did not exist or did not support the propositions.
  • Judge Gerrard ordered the lawyer to pay costs personally and referred the conduct to the regulatory body.
  • Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2).
  • 2025-08-15; the court declined to reproduce the citations to avoid contributing to case hallucinations.
Referred to the bar ChatGPT 2025-08-14
An Arizona federal judge imposed sanctions including revocation of pro hac vice status and mandatory state bar notification for submitting fabricated case citations.
Mavy v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · Maren Ann-Miller Bam · U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona · AZ
“The Court does not take this action lightly.”

Cases that don't exist

  • Brown v. Colvin
  • Wofford v. Berryhill
  • Hobbs v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
cronkitenews.azpbs.org ↗
The file →
  • Mavy v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration; attorney Maren Ann-Miller Bam was sanctioned.
  • Her Social Security appeal brief included AI-generated fabricated, misleading, or unsupported citations.
  • Judge Alison Bachus sanctioned her and ordered notice to the three judges named in the fake opinions.
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona; federal court in Arizona.
  • Aug. 14, 2025; the article says 12 of 19 cited cases were fake and mentions ChatGPT-generated hallucinations.
Reprimanded 2025-08-14
Nathwani received the first Australian practising certificate variation for AI misuse.
[Rishi Nathwani matter] · Rishi Nathwani · Supreme Court of Victoria
“"At the risk of understatement, the manner in which these events have unfolded is unsatisfactory," Elliott told lawyers on Thursday.”
theaibar.in ↗
The file →
  • Nathwani faced sanction over AI misuse.
  • The misuse involved AI, leading to a practising certificate variation.
  • The sanction was a variation of a practising certificate.
  • The incident occurred in the Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia.
  • The incident date is August 2025, and it was the first such variation in Australia.
Warned 2025-08-14
Counsel filed written submissions containing AI-generated hallucinations, and Justice Elliott warned that counsel and solicitors must independently verify any AI use.
Director of Public Prosecutions v GR · Supreme Court of Victoria · VIC
“The ability of the court to rely upon the accuracy of submissions made by counsel is fundamental to the due administration of justice.”
kirstenegroth.blog ↗
The file →
  • Director of Public Prosecutions v GR involved defense counsel.
  • Submissions contained fabricated case law, legal norms, and fictitious quotes.
  • No professional sanctions or monetary penalties were imposed after counsel corrected filings.
  • Supreme Court of Victoria (Australia).
  • Decided August 14, 2025.
Fined $1K 2025-08-13
Lawyer cited fabricated and misrepresented cases, resulting in a $1,000 fine, CLE mandate, and disciplinary committee referral.
Woody Nora v. M & A Transport, Inc., et al. · E.D. Louisiana · LA
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • Woody Nora v. M & A Transport, Inc. involved an unnamed lawyer.
  • Counsel submitted fabricated and misrepresented case law to the court.
  • $1,000 fine, 1 hour of Generative AI CLE, and referral to Disciplinary Committee.
  • E.D. Louisiana (Federal).
  • Decided August 13, 2025.
Referred to the bar ChatGPT 2025-08-12
A barrister filed ChatGPT-drafted grounds with a fictitious Court of Appeal authority and was found to have attempted to mislead the tribunal and referred to the BSB.
MS (Bangladesh) · Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
“attempted to mislead”
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • MS (professional conduct: AI generated documents) is the named matter.
  • ChatGPT-drafted grounds cited a fictitious Court of Appeal authority.
  • The barrister was referred to the Bar Standards Board.
  • The court was the Upper Tribunal (IAC).
  • Promulgated 12 August 2025; the barrister produced further unverified AI output after a short adjournment.
Caught, not sanctioned ChatGPT 2025-08-08
Former Maine lawyer Seth Carey was denied law license reinstatement after submitting a motion drafted with ChatGPT containing unchecked, erroneous case citations.
Seth Carey · Seth Carey · Penobscot County Superior Court · ME
“This conduct is incredibly striking and negatively reflects on multiple criteria for reinstatement.”
bangordailynews.com ↗
The file →
  • Seth Carey sought reinstatement of his suspended Maine law license.
  • Carey used ChatGPT to write a motion and failed to verify the AI-generated citations.
  • Judge Ann Murray denied his reinstatement request without imposing monetary sanctions.
  • The decision was issued in Penobscot County Superior Court, Maine.
  • The court ruled on August 8 after finding Carey failed to show progress or competence.
Reprimanded 2025-08-07
Counsel submitted fabricated legal citations from AI; court issued an admonishment with no monetary sanctions.
Hall v. The Academy Charter School · E.D. New York · NY
“By far, the majority of courts impose sanctions upon the offending lawyer for this sort of conduct and warnings or reprimands have been meted out in cases typically involving pro se litigants.”
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • Hall v. The Academy Charter School involved an unnamed attorney.
  • Counsel submitted briefs containing AI-hallucinated case citations.
  • The court admonished counsel but declined to impose monetary sanctions.
  • E.D. New York (Federal).
  • Decided August 7, 2025; court noted rising AI hallucinations in filings.

Showing 741–750 of 857.

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