Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations
Perry v. Merrick Bank Corporation
United States District Court for the District of Arizona · Federal district courts · AZ · · No. CV-25-02297-PHX-DWL · order
On 2026-06-09, in Perry v. Merrick Bank Corporation, the District of Arizona dismissed the complaint without leave to amend and noted the plaintiff's prior hallucinated citations in related litigation. A self-represented litigant filed a response using quotations that did not appear in the cited source and at least one nonexistent or hallucinated authority.
- Disposition
- The court dismissed the complaint without leave to amend and noted the plaintiff's prior hallucinated citations in related litigation.
- Recorded conduct
- A self-represented litigant filed a response using quotations that did not appear in the cited source and at least one nonexistent or hallucinated authority. — outcome: other; actor: litigant in person
- Canonical record
- Incident tracker entry — verified outcome, regulator disposition and related rules
What the court wrote
Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.
2026) (granting defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, in response to Plaintiff’s “90-page complaint [that] assert[ed] 18 causes of action under federal and state law,” and noting that Plaintiff’s filings included at least one “hallucinated citation” as well as “fake quotations” misattributed to real cases). … … … Court Action. Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 13, cmt. f (1982) (“The better view is that a judgment otherwise final remains so despite the taking of an appeal . . . .”). - 13 - Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 17) is granted.
compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub
Hugging Face