Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations
Kyne v. Ehima
Connecticut Superior Court · State trial courts · CT · · 2026 WL 1330009 · No. NNH-FA-24-5061240-S, DOCKET NO. NNH-FA-26-5066382-S · memorandum opinion
The Connecticut Superior Court on 2026-05-08 denied the name-change petition and contempt motion, added travel-notice directions, and noted likely AI-generated pleadings and nonexistent authority in Kyne v. Ehima. The self-represented father filed a pleading with two fabricated case citations and one fabricated factual or other assertion.
- Disposition
- The court denied the name-change petition and contempt motion, added travel-notice directions, and noted likely AI-generated pleadings and nonexistent authority.
- Recorded conduct
- The self-represented father filed a pleading with two fabricated case citations and one fabricated factual or other assertion. — 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) 1 In an attempt to further understand the father's arguments, the Court attempted to review his pleadings from the dissolution case. The cases he cites for some of his propositions, such as “In re David W. , 58 Conn. App. 237 (2000)” and “In re Marriage of Doyle, 190 Conn. 748 (1983)”, do not exist and are likely artificial intelligence hallucinations. 2 The child resides with two half-siblings, ages ten and eleven, who also bear the surname Kyne. Kyne v. Ehima, Memorandum of Decision at 2 (Dec. 31, 2025, Egan, J. ). The mother's surname is therefore the operative family surname in the household in which Evelyn will be raised. 3 See Androvic v.
Authorities cited in the passage: Kyne. Kyne v. Ehima
compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub
Hugging Face