Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations
David Thomas v. The Quikrete Companies, LLC
United States District Court for the Western District of Texas · Federal district courts · TX · · 2026 WL 594760 · report and recommendation
Western District of Texas on 2026-02-26 in David Thomas v. The Quikrete Companies, LLC found counsel's summary-judgment briefing misrepresented Ash v. Flowers Foods and used hallucinated quotations that do not appear in that opinion. The magistrate judge recommended granting Quikrete summary judgment and denying plaintiffs' summary-judgment motion despite the hallucinated quotation.
- Disposition
- The magistrate judge recommended granting Quikrete summary judgment and denying plaintiffs' summary-judgment motion despite the hallucinated quotation.
- Recorded conduct
- Counsel's summary-judgment briefing misrepresented Ash v. Flowers Foods and used hallucinated quotations that do not appear in that opinion. — 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.
3 Plaintiffs cite Ash throughout their briefing as standing for the proposition that bread products stored in local warehouses for various lengths of time were not in a continuous stream of interstate commerce because they were held in storage “without a fixed and persisting intent to ship to a particular customer.” (See, e.g., Resp. [#99], at 10.) Ash held precisely the opposite. In Ash, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the shipper based on the MCA exemption, finding that the totality of the circumstances supported a finding that there was a fixed intent to move the bread products in interstate commerce. Not only do Plaintiffs blatantly misrepresent the Fifth Circuit's holding in Ash, but they also manufacture or cite hallucinated quotations not appearing in the opinion.
Authorities cited in the passage: briefing allegedly · attributed to the Fifth Circuit · Fifth Circuit's decision in Ash v. Flowers Foods
compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub
Hugging Face