Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations
Zeus Realty Group LLC v. 1032 N Sycamore Owner LA, LLC et al
United States District Court for the Central District of California · Federal district courts · CA · · 2026 WL 563023 · No. No. 4. On January 23, 2026, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion · order
Central District of California on 2026-02-23 in Zeus Realty Group LLC v. 1032 N Sycamore Owner LA, LLC et al found counsel's temporary-restraining-order motion cited nonexistent cases and inaccurate quotations while seeking to halt a state unlawful-detainer proceeding. The court dismissed the complaint without leave to amend, denied the temporary-restraining-order motion, and dismissed the action without prejudice.
- Disposition
- The court dismissed the complaint without leave to amend, denied the temporary-restraining-order motion, and dismissed the action without prejudice.
- Recorded conduct
- Counsel's temporary-restraining-order motion cited nonexistent cases and inaccurate quotations while seeking to halt a state unlawful-detainer proceeding. — outcome: other; actor: lawyer
- 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.
1 As an initial matter, the Court notes that in Defendant's Opposition. Defendant asserts that Plaintiff has filed numerous pleadings based on the same legal and factual grounds already ruled upon by the trial court in the unlawful detainer action. Opposition at 11. Defendant further claims that it believes Plaintiff's recent filings are a product of Artificial Intelligence. Id. The Court notes that Plaintiff's Motion includes citations to nonexistent cases and inaccurate quotations. See Opposition at 910. As stated herein, the Court denies the Motion based on a lack of jurisdiction. Although Defendant's contentions regarding estoppel and artificial intelligence do not directly center on jurisdiction, the Court will address the arguments where relevant.
Authorities cited in the passage: s Motion contained citations to nonexistent cases; Court noted the citations were nonexistent per Defendant · s Motion included inaccurate quotations from cases; Court observed the quotations were inaccurate per Defendant