Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations
Vargas v. MTA Bus Co.
Supreme Court of New York · State trial courts · NY · · 2026 WL 1811875 · No. No. 150611/2019 · order
On 2026-06-12, in Vargas v. MTA Bus Co, Supreme Court of New York amended its prior order and declined to attribute the non-existent citations in duplicated opposition papers to appellate counsel. Counsel filed opposition papers using nonexistent or hallucinated authorities.
- Disposition
- The court amended its prior order and declined to attribute the non-existent citations in duplicated opposition papers to appellate counsel.
- Recorded conduct
- Counsel filed opposition papers using nonexistent or hallucinated authorities. — 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.
The prior decision and order acknowledged the non-existent cases, but the proposition of law in those non-existent citations was, in fact, true. As the filing of identical motion papers in Paez Rodriguez is intended to cure a mistaken belief that “consolidated motion practice” was permissible, this court will not attribute the non-existent citations to appellate counsel for Paez Rodriguez.
compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub
Hugging Face