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.

Apr 2025 Sep 2026

Blamed by name

ChatGPT 53 Claude 4 Lexis+ AI 4 Westlaw Precision 4 CoCounsel 3 Copilot 2 AI-assisted legal software 1 Archie 1 ChatOn 1 ClearBrief 1 CoCounsel, Westlaw Precision, Google Gem 1 Descrybe.ai 1 First Drafts 1 Gemini 1 Ghostwriter Legal 1 Google AI 1 Google Scholar 1 Grok 1 Irys 1 vLex Fastcase 1

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

Hall of Shame

All Fined 1

Showing 1–1 of 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.”
lawfuel.com ↗
The file →
  • Massar Briggs Law and principal lawyer Jason Briggs were involved in a native title determination.
  • A junior solicitor used AI software that fabricated citations for historical and anthropological reports.
  • The court ordered Massar Briggs Law to pay indemnity costs.
  • The matter was heard in the Australian Federal Court before Justice Bernard Murphy.
  • Justice Murphy chose to publish the order as a warning about the risks of generative AI in legal practice.
Get Sanctions Watch in your inbox
New AI-citation sanctions, the morning after they hit the docket.