Skip to content

Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations

James C. Young; Tahnee R. Young v. Happy Money

U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit · Federal bankruptcy courts · · No. 25-6011 · other

Fabricated or misquoted citations

On 2026-04-08, U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the bankruptcy court’s order limiting one debtor’s advocacy for the other and noted that several cited bankruptcy cases did not exist or support the argument. A self-represented party submitted a motion with fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities, including In re Cherrett and In re Pringle.

Disposition
The court affirmed the bankruptcy court’s order limiting one debtor’s advocacy for the other and noted that several cited bankruptcy cases did not exist or support the argument.
Recorded conduct
The motion used fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities, including In re Cherrett and In re Pringle, which the court found nonexistent, misquoted, or unsupported. — 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.

2012), was retrieved. The Swanson case begins on page 495 of volume 475 of the Bankruptcy Reporter and ends on page 535. The case concerns a Uniform Commercial Code issue, not the imposition of sanctions for discovery violations as argued by the Debtors in their brief. The citation for In re Cherrett, 873 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2017), did retrieve the In re Cherrett case; however, the case involves the issue of whether the purchase of a second residence was a business debt or a consumer debt and does not involve sanctions against an attorney as stated by the Debtors in their brief. nonexistent cases is the type of harm rules governing the unauthorized practice of law are designed to prevent. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, we find the bankruptcy court did not err in denying the Debtors’ Motion to the extent that James Young was seeking to represent Tahnee Young or advocate on her behalf in a bankruptcy proceeding that relates solely to her debt and involves alleged violations of the automatic stay that relate solely to efforts to collect a debt from Tahnee Young. 5 Nor did

compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub