Tracker

Sanctions watch

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

Embed this

Incidents tracked

Incidents in 2026

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 Dec 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 Fined 1

Showing 1 incident involving Google Scholar. Clear filters

Fined Google Scholar 2025-04-22

Massar Briggs Law filed court documents with hallucinated footnotes; the court declined referral but ordered indemnity costs.

Murray on behalf of the Wamba Wemba Native Title Claim Group v State of Victoria · Massar Briggs Law · Federal Court of Australia · VIC

“Justice Murphy said it was likely that the false document citations came from using generative AI, which had the capacity to "fabricate" or "hallucinate" information.”

qlsproctor.com.au ↗

The file →

Murray on behalf of the Wamba Wemba Native Title Claim Group v State of Victoria; Massar Briggs Law
Court documents contained multiple hallucinated footnotes and incorrect citations
Court ordered Massar Briggs Law to pay indemnity costs
Federal Court of Australia, Victoria
2025; supervisor failed to review remote work and the court found the citations were hallucinated

Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox

New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.