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 (831 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)
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 developped an automated reference checker that also detects hallucinations: PelAIkan. Check the Reports 
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.
| Case | Court / Jurisdiction | Date ▼ | Party Using AI | AI Tool ⓘ | Nature of Hallucination | Outcome / Sanction | Monetary Penalty | Details | Report(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rasko v. ICBC | BC CRT (Canada) | 30 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
|
Source: Steve Finlay
|
|||||||||
| Folarin v. The Immigration Services Commissionner | First-tier Tribunal (UK) | 29 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | ChatGPT |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Ava Naeini v. Confluent Inc. | CA California (USA) | 29 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
— | — | ||
| Dana Serine Greene v. GSK PLC | W.D. Washington (USA) | 29 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(5)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Howse v. Coulton | BC CRT (Canada) | 29 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Roux v. van Greunen | High Court (South Africa) | 29 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Nonnie Berg v. United Airlines, Inc. (2) | D. Colorado (USA) | 28 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
The court identified citations to seemingly nonexistent cases in the plaintiff's filings (e.g., "Hernandez" and "United States v. Miller"), noted prior warnings about AI-generated or unvetted citations, denied the motions, and warned it may recommend dismissal or similar sanctions if the conduct continues. |
|||||||||
| Life Together Coaching, LLC | GAO (USA) | 28 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: David Timm
|
|||||||||
| Gregory Hardy v. Genesee County Community Action Resource Department, et al. | E.D. Michigan (USA) | 28 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(4)
|
Two reply briefs stricken; warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Brian Bailey v. Hon. Clark A. Ritchie, et al. | W.D. Virginia (USA) | 27 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Ihor Chopko v. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company | CA Arizona (USA) | 27 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Nelson Henry v. Joseph Iannone and James Deacetis | S.D. Florida (USA) | 27 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
False Quotes
Case Law
(2)
|
— | — | ||
| Davidson v PCL Constructors Inc. | HRT Alberta (Canada) | 27 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| MacroCharts Research LLC v. Tony Chou | N.D. California (USA) | 26 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Farag v. Persante et al | M.D. Florida (USA) | 26 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
Misrepresented
Exhibits or Submissions
(3),
Legal Norm
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Ralph J. Massetti, Jr. v. Greenspring Capital Management, LLC, et al. | S.D. Florida (USA) | 26 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
|
Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint included citations the Court could not locate; Greenspring moved for sanctions citing those nonexistent authorities. The Court found pro se status, correction attempts, and voluntary dismissal counseled against sanctions and therefore recommended denying the motion. |
|||||||||
| Cohen v. Egged Transportation Ltd | Magistrates Court of Jerusalem (Israel) | 25 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1),
Legal Norm
(1)
|
Order to Amend | — | — | |
| Femhealth USA Carafem v. Rickey Nelson Williams | M.D. Tennessee (USA) | 23 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1),
Legal Norm
(1)
|
Arguments Struck; Warning | — | — | |
| Dennis Thornton v. Flathead County, et al. | D. Montana (USA) | 23 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(3)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
|
Order to file conventional hard-copy source documents for every cited authority | — | — | |
| Mykhal Lloyd Polite v. TitleMax of Arizona | D. Arizona (USA) | 23 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
|
The Court noted prior use of hallucinated cases attributed to purported AI use and denied Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend as futile. The Court previously denied an earlier motion for failing to comply and because of hallucinated cases; here futility and procedural deficiencies warranted denial. |
|||||||||
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Ann K. Cady, Beth L. Corning, and Caron G. Roesler v. Matthew C. O'Malley | CA Wisconsin (USA) | 23 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (2) | W.D. Virginia (USA) | 23 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(2)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Gu v Fogler Rubinoff | SCJ Ontario (Canada) | 23 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
— | — | ||
|
Source: Courtready
|
|||||||||
| Sidni Campbell v. John Campbell, Jr. | CA Texas (USA) | 22 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| McNeal v. United Food and Commercial Workers Local 555; Safeway, Inc. | D. Oregon (USA) | 22 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Solomon A. Jones v. Kankakee County Sheriff's Department, et al. | Seventh Circuit CA (USA) | 21 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
False Quotes
Case Law
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Volesky v. Department of Child Safety | CA Arizona (USA) | 21 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Peter J. Allsot, as next friend of B.P.L.A. v. Naseem Latif | M.D. Florida (USA) | 20 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Oluronke Briana Adusei v. Colleen Auer, et al. | D. Arizona (USA) | 20 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Mary Stephens v. Helena-West Helena School District | E.D. Arkansas (Delta Division) (USA) | 20 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
Order to Show Cause | — | — | |
| Mitchell Taylor Button et al. v. John Jimison (2) | W.D. Washington (USA) | 20 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(6)
|
Struck filings | — | — | |
| Zou v. Miracon Development Inc. | SC British Columbia (Canada) | 20 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Monetary Sanction | 200 CAD | — | |
|
Source: Courtready
|
|||||||||
| Pellegrino v. York Condominium Corporation No. 486 | CAT (Canada) | 20 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Courtready
|
|||||||||
| Waddell (Re) | Ontario SCJ (Canada) | 20 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
|
Source: Courtready
|
|||||||||
| Riley v. Nuvei Australia Merchant Services | Fair Work Commission (Australia) | 19 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
— | — | ||
| Your Home Partners v. Kellichan | Sheriffdom of Tayside (UK) | 19 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2),
Legal Norm
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Amit Arora v. Canadian National Railway | Federal Court (Canada) | 19 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
Misrepresented
Legal Norm
(1)
|
Admonishment | — | — | |
|
Source: Courtready
|
|||||||||
| Steven E. Hobbs, Sr. v. Igor Goncharko, et al. (2) | N.D. Illinois (USA) | 16 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(4)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Rev. Heidi Grossman Lepp v. Conrad Mallett, Jr., et al. | E.D. Michigan (USA) | 16 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | OpenAI ChatGPT-4o |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Arguments ignored | — | — | |
|
The Court refused to consider a pro se plaintiff's AI-generated "Legal Analysis Report" produced with ChatGPT-4o because it contained incorrect and factitious citations and misstatements of law; the Rule 60(b) motion was denied. |
|||||||||
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Riverchase v. Paula Goldwyn | CA Kansas (USA) | 16 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(3)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(2)
Outdated Advice
Overturned Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Robby Mendez v. City of Topeka, et al. | D. Kansas (USA) | 16 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — |
Plaintiff's Response
|
|
|
While the court did not ascertained whether the plaintiff's brief contained any hallucination, Pelaikan identified at least two, as well as several misrepresentations: see the report here. |
|||||||||
| Tafah et al. v. Lake Village Townhomes et al. | D. Maryland (USA) | 16 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| X. v. Canada | D. DC (USA) | 16 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
|
Adverse Costs order | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Robert Huish v HRMC | First-tier Tribunal (UK) | 16 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(4)
|
— | — | ||
| Lutfi v. Tucker | Federal Circuit and Family Court (Australia) | 16 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Kisha Peters v. Banner Health | S.D. Texas (USA) | 15 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | ChatGPT |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
|
Recommended Dismissal with Prejudice | — | — | |
| James Fahey v. Wally’s Las Vegas, LLC, et al. | D. Nevada (USA) | 15 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
False Quotes
Case Law
(5)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Re: IMO the Estate of Joseph L. Weddington | CC Delaware (USA) | 15 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Hang Zhang v. Daniel Driscoll | N.D. California (USA) | 14 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(2)
|
Monetary Sanction | 500 USD | — | |
|
Order to Show Cause is here. |
|||||||||
| Suday v. Suday | CA Texas (USA) | 14 January 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(6)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
The court found that nearly all caselaw cited in the appellant's supplemental brief could not be located and appears fictitious; the court suggested the use of an AI tool but chose to address the merits and issued a caution about reliance on such tools. |
|||||||||