Maintained by AI agents, supervised by legal engineers
legaltech.fyi Beta

Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this
8
Incidents tracked
3
Incidents in 2026
$12,000
In fines, where reported
3 of 8 report an amount

The curve

Incidents per month

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

Mar 2025 Aug 2026

Charting 7 of 8 incidents — the rest are undated or fall outside this window.

Blamed by name

ChatGPT 156 Claude 9 Copilot 8 Gemini 7 Lexis+ AI 4 LegalAI 3 Westlaw Precision 3 ChatOn 2 CoCounsel 2 LEAP 2 AI-assisted legal software 1 AI-based legal software 1 Archie 1 Centient AI 1 ChatGPT-4o 1 Descrybe.ai 1 Eve 1 GPT-3.5 1 Generative artificial intelligence (unsp 1 Ghostwriter Legal 1 Google AI Overview 1 Google Scholar 1 Grammarly 1 Grok 1 Legal Genius 1 Lexis 1 Lexis Nexis 1 Morgan & Morgan’s in-house Artificial In 1 OpenCase 1 OpenLaw 1 Perplexity AI 1 Westlaw CoCounsel 1 Westlaw’s CoCounsel 1 in-house AI database 1

Counts only incidents where the filing court or the reporting named the tool.

Hall of Shame

All Warned 5 Fined 2 Referred to the bar 1

Showing 8 incidents involving Copilot. Clear filters

Warned Copilot
A solo practitioner used Microsoft CoPilot to find supporting caselaw, filed it without checking the cases existed, and the bankruptcy court ordered a rule to show cause.
In re Richburg · Bankruptcy Court in South Carolina · SC
““for his blind reliance on a technological tool which he did not seem to fully understand.””
sandbergphoenix.com ↗
The file →
  • In re Richburg; solo practitioner in South Carolina
  • He used Microsoft CoPilot to find cases and filed them without checking they existed
  • No monetary sanctions; the court required AI-ethics CLE
  • Bankruptcy court in South Carolina
  • Date not given; court called it a lesson learned for the bar in general
Warned Copilot 2026-08-01
Paul Held cited fake cases in court papers, and the South Carolina bankruptcy court ordered him to complete continuing legal education, including AI ethics training.
Paul Held · Paul Held · South Carolina bankruptcy court · SC
“from haste and a naive understanding of the technology”
news.bloomberglaw.com ↗
The file →
  • Paul Held, a solo practitioner, was sanctioned by the South Carolina bankruptcy court.
  • He cited fake cases in court papers after AI use.
  • The court ordered continuing legal education including AI ethics training.
  • The sanction was issued in South Carolina bankruptcy court.
  • The article says the citations generated by Microsoft Copilot came from haste and a naive understanding of the technology.
Fined $5K Copilot 2026-06-11
Ginsburg filed a brief with a fake case, fake quotes, and incorrect legal propositions, and the court imposed sanctions and struck the response.
McCormick v. Texakoma Financial, Inc. · Amy L.B. Ginsburg · U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas · TX
“If someone—even an intern—gets the case name, number, year, and quotation wrong, they are not struggling with research or citation formatting. They are struggling with honesty.”
tcpaworld.com ↗
The file →
  • McCormick v. Texakoma Financial, Inc. against Amy L.B. Ginsburg
  • Brief contained a fake case, fake quotes, and incorrect legal propositions
  • Court ordered a $5,000 penalty and struck the response
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Texas
  • June 11, 2026; court also ordered publication, CLE, and future verification certification
Warned Copilot 2025-12-11
Dana McClain filed a pleading with AI-generated citations that could not be verified, and the Arkansas Supreme Court issued a show-cause order.
Dana McClain · Dana McClain · Arkansas Supreme Court · AR
“In its order, the Supreme Court reminded attorneys they are responsible for the accuracy of all filings and warned that misuse of artificial intelligence in legal work could result in discipline, including substantial fines, suspension or loss of the privilege to practice law in Arkansas.”
ktlo.com ↗
The file →
  • Dana McClain was the Arkansas attorney involved.
  • She filed court documents containing AI-generated citations that could not be verified.
  • The Arkansas Supreme Court issued a show-cause order; the article does not report a monetary sanction.
  • Arkansas Supreme Court, Arkansas.
  • Dec. 11, 2025; she said she used Microsoft Office Copilot to draft the response and failed to verify the citations.
Warned Copilot 2025-09-29
A lawyer filed fabricated and misrepresented case law using Microsoft Copilot, and the tribunal issued a show-cause order.
ANPV & SAPV v Secretary of State for the Home Department · Upper Tribunal
damiencharlotin.com ↗
The file →
  • ANPV & SAPV v Secretary of State for the Home Department involved a lawyer filing.
  • Microsoft Copilot was the named AI tool.
  • The filing contained fabricated and misrepresented case law, and the tribunal issued a show-cause order.
  • Upper Tribunal, UK.
  • 29 September 2025; the page lists a show-cause order.
Referred to the bar $1K Copilot 2025-07-29
The attorney filed papers with AI-generated case summaries and misleading citations, and the court fined him $1,000 and referred him to the Attorney Grievance Committee.
Idehen v. Stoute-Phillip · Innocent Chinweze · New York trial court · NY
“The judge, Kimon C. Thermos, called the excuse an “incredible and unsupported statement.””
nysba.org ↗
The file →
  • Idehen v. Stoute-Phillip; the attorney for the landlord
  • Papers included cites to real cases that did not support the propositions stated and AI-generated summaries
  • The court imposed a $1,000 fine and referred the attorney to grievance authorities
  • New York trial court
  • Counsel first said he used Microsoft Copilot and did not read the cases cited
Fined $6K Copilot 2025-07-01
Post-trial filings contained about 30 defective citations generated by Copilot, Gemini, and Grok, and Judge Nina Y. Wang imposed sanctions.
Coomer v. Lindell · Christopher I. Kachouroff; Jennifer T. DeMaster; MyPillow attorneys · U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado · CO
“the “least severe sanction adequate to deter and punish defense counsel in this instance.””
getvoibe.com ↗
The file →
  • Coomer v. Lindell sanctioned Christopher I. Kachouroff and Jennifer T. DeMaster.
  • Their post-trial filings contained about 30 defective citations from Copilot, Gemini, and Grok.
  • Judge Nina Y. Wang imposed $3,000 each, totaling $6,000.
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.
  • July 2025; in April 2026 Wang issued an order to show cause proposing additional sanctions.
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.