Kelly Bartholomew v. Public Utility Commission of Oregon

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

still failed to acknowledge the egregiousness of her conduct and, instead, continued to minimize it. Nothing in petitioner’s response to the show cause order demonstrates, even an attempt at, transparency. Petitioner continued to avoid explaining how any of the fabricated case citations came to be, despite the fact that they are clearly the type of fake legal authority fabricated by artificial intelligence (AI) that the court has recently sanctioned. See Ringo, 345 Or App 301; Powell, 347 Or App 55. Petitioner attached to her response to the show cause order a copy of an email correspondence between herself and an assistant at the Law Library of Clackamas County, which demonstrate that petitioner had informed the library assistant that the case citations came from petitioner’s use of AI. Despite the emails, in her response to the show cause order petitioner maintained her vague argument that she used “secondary sources” to draft the brief. The court agrees with PGE that “to the extent that Petitioner’s non-existent citations resulted from the use of artificial intelligence (AI), she did not rely on a secondary source” and that petitioner’s “lack of transparency and candor should