Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations

Garcia v. City of Monte Vista, Colorado

United States District Court for the District of Colorado · Federal district courts · CO · 2026-05-29 · No. 25-cv-0769 · order

Fabricated or misquoted citations Competence, fees and billing

On 2026-05-29, in Garcia v. City of Monte Vista, Colorado et al, the District of Colorado ordered counsel to show cause why sanctions should not issue for relying on an allegedly fabricated autopsy and forensic report. Counsel filed a motion using quotations that did not appear in the cited source and nonexistent or hallucinated authorities.

Disposition: The court ruled on motions to dismiss and stated it would separately enter an order to show cause regarding counsel’s Miller citation.
Recorded conduct: Defense counsel cited Miller v. Spiers for a quotation and proposition that the court could not find in the case. The court stated it would separately enter an order to show cause. — outcome: pending; 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.

The Court is deeply concerned that counsel’s citation to Miller is a product of the un-verified work of generative artificial intelligence. The Court will separately enter an order to show cause on this matter.

Authorities cited in the passage: Dubbs v. Head Start · Rule 12(b)(6) · Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)

Court document: govinfo.gov
Public copy first read: damiencharlotin.com
Read: 2026-09-08 · court's own copy read
Found via: charlotin-hallucinations-db
Notes: Read from the copy held by Damien Charlotin's AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0) of the court-authored document. Official copy located 2026-09-08 via govinfo; quoted passage confirmed in the official document. Re-coded from the document 2026-09-08 (independent second read).

United States court documents are public domain; the topic coding, disposition line and summary are SafeLegalAI's reading of the document for comparison, not a finding about any person named in it. This record summarises a public court document or official publication and reports what it says; SafeLegalAI makes no findings of its own. Individuals and organisations are named only as they appear in that public record. Anyone named may send a right of reply, correction or contextual update (for example an appeal, vacatur or later disposition) via /report; we add a dated note where appropriate. Reply or correct this record.

compiled by the SafeLegalAI editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-08v0.2.2coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub