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
1
Incidents tracked
0
Incidents in 2026
$0
In fines, where reported
0 of 1 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

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 1

Showing 1 incident involving Descrybe.ai. Clear filters

Warned Descrybe.ai 2025-07-23
David P. Stich filed an opposition containing three nonexistent cases, and Judge Janet C. Hall warned an eye-catching sanction may be needed but imposed no immediate punishment.
Cojom v. Roblen LLC · David P. Stich · U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut · CT
“"It's my problem ... if we don't stop you by some eye-catching sanction," Judge Hall told Stich.”
law360.com ↗
The file →
  • Cojom v. Roblen LLC; attorney David P. Stich was called to account
  • His opposition brief contained three cases that do not exist
  • Judge Hall declined immediate punishment and issued a warning
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, New Haven
  • July 23, 2025; Stich said he had "trusted a tool"
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.