legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this
13
Incidents tracked
4
Incidents in 2026
$57,100
In fines, where reported
2 of 13 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 5 of 13 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 53 Caught, not sanctioned 32 Warned 20 Referred to the bar 17 Reprimanded 13 Filing dismissed 9 Outcome unclear 6 Suspension 1

Showing 1–10 of 13 incidents involving ChatGPT. Clear filters

Reprimanded ChatGPT
An Oklahoma Supreme Court reprimanded an attorney for submitting legal motions containing AI-generated fake case citations.
Lawrence Wheeler · Lawrence Wheeler · Oklahoma Supreme Court · OK
“the careless use of generative artificial intelligence … damages the integrity and credibility of the legal system.”

Cases that don't exist

  • Cummings v. Cimarron Elevator Co.
  • Hawkins v. Linhart
oklahoman.com ↗
The file →
  • An unnamed attorney was reprimanded by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
  • The attorney submitted legal motions containing AI-generated fabrications.
  • The sanction imposed was a formal public reprimand.
  • The matter was handled by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
  • The reprimand occurred in May (year not specified); the court warned AI misuse damages legal integrity.
Reprimanded ChatGPT
The court reprimanded an attorney for filing a murder appeal brief containing hallucinated police testimony generated by ChatGPT.
State of New Mexico v. Manuel Sifuentes · L. Helen Bennett · New Mexico Supreme Court · NM
threads.com ↗
The file →
  • State v. Sifuentes involved defense attorney L. Helen Bennett.
  • Bennett used ChatGPT to draft a brief containing fabricated police testimony.
  • The New Mexico Supreme Court issued a formal public reprimand.
  • The ruling was handed down by the New Mexico Supreme Court.
  • The court noted ChatGPT invented testimony not in the actual trial record.
Reprimanded ChatGPT
Zachary Larsen was handed a stayed indefinite suspension, two years of supervised probation, and a public reprimand for submitting fake AI-generated citations to the court.
Zachary Larsen · Zachary Larsen · Minnesota Supreme Court · MN
webstat.net ↗
The file →
  • Attorney Zachary Larsen was disciplined by the Minnesota Supreme Court.
  • Larsen used ChatGPT to draft a motion that contained six hallucinated, fake case citations.
  • The court issued an stayed indefinite suspension, public reprimand, and 2 years of probation.
  • The decision was handed down by the Minnesota Supreme Court in Minnesota.
  • The court's ruling in December 2023 noted Larsen showed reckless disregard for the truth.
Reprimanded ChatGPT 2026-08-24
The court issued a formal public reprimand after a lawyer submitted court filings containing false quotes and misrepresented cases generated by ChatGPT.
Michael L. Ruiz v. Magellan Financial & Insurance Services (2) · U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona · AZ
law360.com ↗
The file →
  • Michael L. Ruiz v. Magellan Financial involved a lawyer who used ChatGPT to generate legal submissions.
  • Counsel filed briefs containing false quotes and misrepresented case law created by ChatGPT.
  • The court issued a formal public reprimand against the lawyer.
  • The decision occurred in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.
  • The formal reprimand was ordered on August 24, 2026.
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.
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.
Reprimanded ChatGPT
Forrister submitted AI-fabricated citations in a filing and faced discipline from the Texas Supreme Court.
In re: The State Bar of Texas v. Christopher W. Forrister · Christopher W. Forrister · Supreme Court of Texas · TX
caseread.ai ↗
The file →
  • Christopher W. Forrister was disciplined for AI-fabricated citations.
  • He filed a document that included fake citations generated by AI.
  • The Texas Supreme Court issued a reprimand.
  • The court was the Supreme Court of Texas.
  • The page names ChatGPT as the AI tool but gives no order date.
Reprimanded ChatGPT 2026-05-21
H. Gregory Harp filed a response with false quotations attributed to real cases and was sanctioned by Judge Harold D. Mooty III.
Jackie Miller v. Regions Bank · H. Gregory Harp · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama · AL
““Lawyers make errors. Competent and ethical lawyers own them””
findlaw.com ↗
The file →
  • Jackie Miller v. Regions Bank; attorney H. Gregory Harp
  • Harp filed a response with false quotations in support of summary judgment briefing
  • He was sanctioned and suspended for six months in the Northern District of Alabama
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Alabama
  • May 21, 2026; the court suspected generative AI and Harp later admitted using free ChatGPT for proofreading
Reprimanded $47K ChatGPT 2026-03-31
Attorney Joshua B. Watkins and Burrill Watkins LLC were publicly reprimanded for AI-fabricated legal statements and citations in Rivera v. Triad Properties Corp.
Joel A. Rivera v. Triad Properties Corporation, et al. · Joshua B. Watkins; Burrill Watkins LLC · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama · AL
“Mr. Watkins's misconduct includes—and extends well beyond—the misuse of artificial intelligence to make both misleading and outright fabricated statements of law.”
reason.com ↗
The file →
  • Rivera v. Triad Properties Corp.; Joshua B. Watkins and Burrill Watkins LLC were sanctioned.
  • Watkins used AI to make false statements of law and hallucinated cases in filings and hearings.
  • The court publicly reprimanded them and ordered $47,056.90 in fee payments total.
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama; Judge Anna Manasco.
  • The order says the conduct violated Rule 11 and warranted sanctions under the court's inherent authority.
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.