AI Hallucination Cases

This database tracks legal decisions1 I.e., all documents where the use of AI, whether established or merely alleged, is addressed in more than a passing reference by the court or tribunal.

Notably, this does not cover mere allegations of hallucinations, but only cases where the court or tribunal has explicitly found (or implied) that a party relied on hallucinated content or material.

As an exception, the database also covers some judicial decisions where AI use was alleged but not confirmed. This is a judgment call on my part.
in cases where generative AI produced hallucinated content – typically fake citations, but also other types of AI-generated arguments. It does not track the (necessarily wider) universe of all fake citations or use of AI in court filings.

While seeking to be exhaustive (558 cases identified so far), it is a work in progress and will expand as new examples emerge. This database has been featured in news media, and indeed in several decisions dealing with hallucinated material.2 Examples of media coverage include:
- M. Hiltzik, AI 'hallucinations' are a growing problem for the legal profession (LA Times, 22 May 2025)
- E. Volokh, "AI Hallucination Cases," from Courts All Over the World (Volokh Conspiracy, 18 May 2025)
- J-.M. Manach, "Il génère des plaidoiries par IA, et en recense 160 ayant « halluciné » depuis 2023" (Next, 1 July 2025) - J. Koebler & J. Roscoe, "18 Lawyers Caught Using AI Explain Why They Did It (404 Media, 30 September 2025)

If you have any questions about the database, a FAQ is available here.
And if you know of a case that should be included, feel free to contact me.3 (Readers may also be interested in this project regarding AI use in academic papers.)

Based on this database, I have developed an automated reference checker that also detects hallucinations: PelAIkan. Check the Reports Report icon in the database for examples, and reach out to me for a demo.

For weekly takes on cases like these, and what they mean for legal practice, subscribe to Artificial Authority.

Click to Download CSV
Last updated: 22 May 2026
State
Party
Nature – Category
Nature – Subcategory

Case Court / Jurisdiction Date ▼ Party Using AI AI Tool Nature of Hallucination Outcome / Sanction Monetary Penalty Details Report(s)
Abdul Rahim Seidu v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Federal Court (Canada) (Canada) 10 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Doctrinal Work (1)
Admonishment
Matter of Zareh SC New York (USA) 10 February 2026 Lawyer ChatGPT
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Respondent publicly censured

Respondent filed an opposition brief in federal litigation containing numerous citation errors and misstatements of law. The District Court found the brief AI-generated, noting ChatGPT described at least one cited case in the same erroneous manner, and admonished counsel; this Court imposed reciprocal discipline in the form of a public censure for failure to supervise and for filing an unreviewed AI-drafted brief.

N. 4203/2025 R.G. TO Verona (Italy) 10 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Exhibits or Submissions (1)
Monetary Sanction 1800 EUR
Valve Corporation v. Rothschild et al. W.D. Washington (USA) 9 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (3)
False Quotes Case Law (6)
Misrepresented Case Law (2)
Outdated Advice Overturned Case Law (1)
Order to show cause
Report
Defendant's Daubert Motion

When warned about the issue, cousel apologised in an open letter to the Court.

Later on, the Court issued a Show Cause Order (see here).

Peter L. Clinco v. Commissioner US Tax Court (USA) 9 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (2)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Admonishment
Kusmin L. Amarsingh v. Frontier Airlines, Inc. CA Tenth Circuit (USA) 9 February 2026 Lawyer ChatGPT
Fabricated Case Law (2)
False Quotes Case Law (3)
Monetary Sanction; Bar Referral 1000 USD
Source: David Timm
Daniel James Cummins v. Moises Becerra E.D. California (USA) 9 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (5)
Order to Show Cause
Ave. Capital Group, LLC v. Strum SC New York (USA) 9 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (2)
Order to Show Cause
Raul Gonzales Davila v. Roblen United States District Court, D. Connecticut (USA) 6 February 2026 Lawyer Unidentified
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
CLE
Arkansas DHS v. April Ward and Minor Child Respondents SC Arkansas (USA) 5 February 2026 Lawyer Copilot
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
Outdated Advice Repealed Law (1)
Report to Office of Professional Conduct and Counsel dismissal

Order to Show Cause is here.

Source: Robert Freund
Woodward Harbor L.L.C., et al. v. City of Mandeville E.D. Louisiana (USA) 5 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Monetary Sanction; CLE 1000 USD

Show Cause Order is here.

Flycatcher v. Affable Avenue S.D. New York (USA) 5 February 2026 Lawyer NotebookLM; vLex; Paxton AI
Fabricated Case Law (2)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Brief Struck; Default Judgment
Report
Memorandum of Law

Counsel Steven A. Feldman repeatedly filed submissions containing AI-generated nonexistent case citations and misattributed quotations. Opposing counsel flagged numerous errors; the Court found fabricated citations and false quotes, concluded counsel acted in bad faith or with conscious avoidance, struck the filings, and entered default judgment against counsel's client Affable Avenue LLC. The Court permitted opposing counsel to apply for attorneys' fees.

Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express D. Arizona (USA) 4 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Warning
In re the Matter of: Abius Rosas Carreon CA Arizona (USA) 4 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Warning
Ericka Holmes v. The University of Texas at Austin W.D. Texas (USA) 4 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (2), Exhibits or Submissions (1)
Show Cause Order
Sophia Madigan v. Graco Inc. D. Minnesota (USA) 4 February 2026 Lawyer Unidentified
Fabricated Case Law (2)
Warning
Joann LeDoux v. Outliers, Inc. W.D. Washington (USA) 4 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1), Doctrinal Work (1), Legal Norm (1)
False Quotes Case Law (4), Exhibits or Submissions (1)
Order to Show Cause
RSR Road Surface Recycling v Bonnechere Excavating et al. Ontario SCJ (Canada) 4 February 2026 Lawyer Unidentified
False Quotes Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Misuse of AI potentially factored into costs
Kizzie Sims & Estate of Gregory Neil Davis v. Board of County Commissioners W.D. Oklahoma (USA) 3 February 2026 Lawyer Unidentified
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
1S REO Opportunity 1, LLC v. 223 Howard LLC E.D. New York (USA) 3 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Source: Jesse Schaefer
Pasuengos v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (No 2) Federal Circuit and Family Court (Australia) 3 February 2026 Lawyer Unidentified
Fabricated Case Law (3)
Bar Referral
Lexos Media IP, LLC v. Overstock.com, Inc. D. Kansas (USA) 2 February 2026 Lawyer ChatGPT
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (6)
Misrepresented Case Law (2)
Brief struck, monetary sanction, firm compliance 12000 USD

Order to show cause was here. Defendant later obtained summary judgment, in part because plaintiff failed to cite any legal authority (once the hallucinated material was stricken).

Source: Robert Freund
Ortiz Fatima Cecilia v. Booking.com y otros JCC de Tucumán (Argentina) 2 February 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (6)
Monetary sanction, bar referral, adverse costs order 620000 ARS
Stephen Schaaf v. Nellis Auction Holdings, LLC, et al. D. Nevada (USA) 30 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Admonishment
PSAHSC v. Tchampet High Court (UK) 30 January 2026 Lawyer Microsoft Co-Pilot
False Quotes Case Law (2)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Warning
Abybatou Mbow v. Officer Michael Mackert et al. D. Maryland (USA) 28 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (2)
Misrepresented Case Law (4)
Order to Show Cause
Matter of: Bramstedt Surgical Inc. GAO (USA) 28 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (7)
Warning
Source: David Timm
SAS La Volumerie TA Rennes (France) 28 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)

The tribunal rejected the company's request because none of the grounds were sufficiently detailed and the petition was manifestly drafted using a generative AI tool; the court relied on article R.222-1(7) to dismiss the filing for lack of necessary precision.

Cassata v. Michael Macrina Architect, P.C. SC New York (USA) 27 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (2), Exhibits or Submissions (1)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (2)
Monetary Sanction; Brief struck 10000 USD
Source: Jesse Schaefer
Lifetime Well LLC v. IBSpot.com Inc. E.D. Pennsylvania (USA) 26 January 2026 Lawyer Lexis+ AI; LexisNexis Protégé
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Monetary Sanction; Order to share opinion with Professional Association 4000

"Judges and commentators continue to warn lawyers about the risks of artificial intelligence shortcuts. We today address a more fundamental concern: lack of diligence and supervision of less experienced lawyers who can fairly expect supervision. The lawyers disregarded basic fundamental understandings learned in law school about the need to ensure the case citations presented to judges support what lawyers say they do. Counsel fell far short of this fundamental obligation warranting monetary sanctions against the New York co-counsel and non-monetary sanctions against both the New York co-counsel and her local Philadelphia co-counsel.

Attorneys are again forewarned. Judges and their talented lawyers in Chambers scrutinize memoranda. Submissions containing unverified authority divert limited resources from other litigants who rely on their advocates’ careful research, accurate citation, and disciplined advocacy. These sanctions serve as a reminder the attorney’s oath of admission demands no less."

Tarek Jabarin v. National Insurance Institute Haifa Regional Labor Court (Israel) 25 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Monetary Penalty 4000 ILS
Future Field Solutions v. Nordstrand D. Maryland (USA) 23 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Exhibits or Submissions (4)
No Sanctions at this time
Future Field Solutions, LLC v. Van Norstrand D. Maryland (USA) 23 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1), Exhibits or Submissions (1)
Misrepresented Exhibits or Submissions (4)
Tolbert v. State CA Georgia (USA) 22 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
False Quotes Case Law (1), Exhibits or Submissions (2)
Misrepresented Case Law (1)
Outdated Advice Overturned Case Law (1)
Counsel to serve opinion on client and State Bar; CLE; Bar referral
Source: Jesse Schaefer
Gonen v. Ashkenazi Tel Aviv Magistrate Court (Israel) 22 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Claim dismissed
That Xiong v. Minga Wofford E.D. California (USA) 22 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (2)
Order to inform client and staff of errors
Kaufman v. Upton D. Massachusetts (USA) 21 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Bar Referral
Source: Jesse Schaefer
Cruz v. Manzano y Asociados Concepción (Chile) 21 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Monetary Sanction
William Parker v. Patrick "Pat" Labat, et al. N.D. Georgia (USA) 21 January 2026 Lawyer Unidentified
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (4)
Misrepresented Case Law (2)
CLE; Sworn statement

While the R&R recommended a monetary sanction, in the eventual order (available here), the court opted only for six hours of CLE, and the requirement of a "sworn statement with every document [Counsel] files in this Court verifying that [Counsel] has personally checked all citations and quotations in the filing to ensure accuracy."

Yue v. Reaction Labs, LLC W.D. Texas (USA) 20 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (2)
Warning
Source: Jesse Schaefer
The Republic of Uganda v Tugume Abubakar High Court (Uganda) 19 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (2)
Warning
Hodges v. Meridian Waste & Rieske v. AFS M.D. Florida (USA) 16 January 2026 Lawyer Unidentified
Fabricated Case Law (2)
Adverse costs order; requirement to speak to bar associations or law students about experience 7000 USD
Tiffany K. v. Commissioner of Social Security E.D. Michigan (USA) 16 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Warning
Source: Jesse Schaefer
Alzado-Lotz v. Bock D. Colorado (USA) 16 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
False Quotes Case Law (1)
North Atlantic Operating Company, Inc., et al. v. Indiana Import, LLC, et al. S.D. Indiana (USA) 15 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (2)
Warning; Order to retain local counsel
Report
Motion to Dismiss
Source: Jesse Schaefer
Irine Corst v. Isak Mushailov and Levsho Kukuliyeva CC New York City (USA) 15 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (1)
Misrepresented Case Law (3)
Source: Jesse Schaefer
Lindalbeth Lopez Hernandez v. Leanna Lundy E.D. California (USA) 14 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (2)
(HC) Xiong v. Becerra et al. E.D. California (USA) 14 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (2)
Order to have staff read transcript where issue was discussed
Boyd v. Lee AC Maryland (USA) 14 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (4)
Misrepresented Case Law (4)
Order to Show Cause
Mavy v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration D. Arizona (USA) 13 January 2026 Lawyer Implied
Fabricated Case Law (3)
False Quotes Case Law (5)
Misrepresented Case Law (6)
Revocation of pro hac vice status, striking of the brief

In an earlier order, following Show Cause proceedings, a magistrate determined that the counsel violated Rule 11(b)(2) by failing to verify the accuracy of the citations and imposed several sanctions:

  1. "The pro hac vice status of Counsel shall be revoked and Counsel will be removed from this case;
  2. Plaintiff’s Opening Brief shall be stricken;
  3. Counsel will be ordered to promptly serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff, who will in turn be afforded time to engage new counsel or proceed as a self-represented litigant;
  4. Counsel will be ordered to write a letter to the three Judges to whom she attributed fictitious cases, [...], notifying them of her use of fake cases with their respective names attached;
  5. Counsel will be ordered to transmit a copy of this Order to every Judge who presides over any case in which Counsel is attorney of record; and
  6. The Clerk of Court’s Office will be directed to serve a copy of this Order on the Washington State Bar Association, of which Counsel is a member. If Counsel is a member of any other state’s bar, she shall serve a copy of this Order on that state’s bar office."

The court later reversed all sanctions, but reinstated the first and second on other grounds.

Source: Robert Freund