Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations
Landberg v City of New York
Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department · State appellate courts · NY · · No. 2025-02380 · order
On 2026-05-20, in Landberg v City of New York, New York's Second Department ordered the filer to show cause why sanctions should not issue for the defective authorities. Counsel filed a brief using unsupported or inaccurate legal authorities. The sanction issue remained pending after the order.
- Disposition
- The court ordered the filer to show cause why sanctions should not issue for the defective authorities.
- Recorded conduct
- Counsel filed a brief using unsupported or inaccurate legal authorities. — 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.
Lamonsoff, PLLC, and Michael Sanders, Esq., pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, for filing briefs containing fabricated and/or erroneous legal authority and/or citations, by serving and filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue, via NYSCEF, on or before June 3, 2026; and it is further, ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court, or his designee, shall serve a copy of this ordertoshowcauseuponthepartiesbyuploadingacopyofthisordertoshowcausetotheNYSCEF system. LASALLE, P.J., BRATHWAITE NELSON, WARHIT and GOLDBERG VELAZQUEZ, JJ., concur. ENTER: Darrell M.
Authorities cited in the passage: 22 NYCRR 130-1.1
compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub
Hugging Face