Courts on AI / Self-represented litigants using AI

Cole v. Midland States Bank

United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · Federal district courts · MA · 2026-06-01 · No. 25-10216 · order

Self-represented litigants using AI Substantive AI law courts citeGAI

On 2026-06-01, in Richard A. Cole v. Midland States Bank, et al, the District of Massachusetts admonished the filer to verify authorities before presenting AI-assisted or otherwise unsupported legal citations. A self-represented litigant filed a motion using authorities used for propositions they did not support and a nonexistent rule or legal standard.

Disposition: The court allowed the motion to dismiss and admonished plaintiff not to rely on AI overview output as legal authority.
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.

his opposition to the motion to dismiss ... relies on the output of generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) to support his contention that he is a “consumer” under the EFTA.

Court document: damiencharlotin.com
Read: 2026-09-07 · court document read from a public copy; the court's own copy was not found online when checked (see notes)provisional
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 Re-coded from the document 2026-09-08 (independent second read). Official copy not obtained 2026-09-08: not in the court's GovInfo feed for this docket (many district courts publish only some orders) (checked govinfo.gov (USCOURTS), CourtListener RECAP search).

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