legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this
19
Incidents tracked
5
Incidents in 2026
$0
In fines, where reported
0 of 19 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 19 incidents; the rest are undated or fall outside this window.

Blamed by name

ChatGPT 19 Copilot 5 AI-assisted legal software 2 ChatGPT-4o 1 Claude 1 CoCounsel 1 Lexis+ AI 1 Strongsuit 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 1–10 of 19 incidents involving ChatGPT. Clear filters

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
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.
Warned ChatGPT
A U.S. lawyer used ChatGPT to draft filings and cited fake cases; a federal judge responded with a standing order on AI use.
ChatGPT references nonexistent legal cases · A U.S. lawyer · federal judge
evidentlyai.com ↗
The file →
  • A U.S. lawyer in the ChatGPT case
  • He used ChatGPT and ended up citing entirely fake legal cases
  • The judge issued a standing order, not a monetary penalty
  • Federal court; the page gives no judge name or location
  • The page says the lawyer did not realize ChatGPT was a generative language tool
Warned ChatGPT
Three lawyers were warned after using ChatGPT to cite fake or incorrect legal cases in court, and two were ordered to take an AI training course.
Dutch lawyers warned for misusing ChatGPT in court · Three lawyers in the Netherlands
nltimes.nl ↗
The file →
  • Three lawyers in the Netherlands were warned
  • They misused ChatGPT to cite fake or incorrect legal cases in court
  • Sanction was a warning, and two lawyers had to take an AI training course
  • No court or judge name is given in the page text
  • The report says two were ordered to take an AI training course
Warned ChatGPT
A firm filed two briefs with five false ChatGPT-generated citations, and a federal judge was considering sanctions and potential fines.
another firm · federal judge
courtroomsciences.com ↗
The file →
  • Another firm faced possible sanctions for false citations.
  • Attorneys filed two briefs containing five ChatGPT-generated false citations.
  • The judge was considering sanctions and potential fines; no amount is given.
  • A federal judge in federal court.
  • The partner admitted using ChatGPT without verification and the firm apologized.
Warned ChatGPT
A lawyer’s suspected AI use led to fake cases being cited before the tribunal, and the tribunal warned that uploading confidential client documents to ChatGPT breached privilege.
Munir v. Secretary of State for the Home Department · Immigration and Asylum Chamber
blakes.com ↗
The file →
  • Munir v. Secretary of State for the Home Department involved a lawyer suspected of using AI-generated fake cases.
  • The lawyer said he did not know how the fake cases appeared in his submissions.
  • The tribunal warned that uploading confidential client documents into an open-source AI tool breaches client confidentiality and waives privilege.
  • Immigration and Asylum Chamber (U.K.).
  • The page says the lawyer admitted putting client letters and other confidential material in ChatGPT.
Warned ChatGPT
Two lawyers filed a brief with non-existent cases; the High Court warned of severe sanctions after ChatGPT was found to have been used.
High Court of Justice in London warning matter · High Court of Justice in London
“The technology was “not capable of conducting reliable legal research.””
posteo.de ↗
The file →
  • Two lawyers submitted a brief citing cases that could not be found.
  • One lawyer had asked ChatGPT for evidence supporting the claim.
  • The High Court warned of severe sanctions, not a monetary penalty.
  • High Court of Justice in London.
  • Last summer; judge said the tools can produce plausible but incorrect responses.
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.