Incident Tracker
52 verified incidents · as of 2026-10-05
2026-09-29Warning
Hill v. Foundation Media LLCIn New York federal court, Judge Arun Subramanian ordered defence counsel to explain AI-affected quotations in a response brief, took no further action, and called the episode a wakeup call. Counsel's 1 October letter disclosed that Harvey, including updates referred to as Harvey 2.0, was used to prepare the response.
2026-09-25Sanctions
Aguilar v. The Crawford Group, Inc.In Massachusetts federal court, Judge Angel Kelley sanctioned California-barred counsel under Rule 11 for fictitious and misattributed citations across three briefs. His firm must pay the Enterprise defendants' fees and costs, capped at $10,000, and the court revoked his pro hac vice admission. Local counsel was not sanctioned but was reminded of his supervisory duties.
2026-09-24Fine
Chirece C. v. Commissioner of Social SecurityIn Michigan federal court, Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Stafford fined a Social Security claimant's lawyer $500 for AI-generated fictitious citations she admitted not checking. The same lawyer had been sanctioned in July in another case. The order warned her and Disability Law Group of heavier sanctions if uncorrected filings remain after 16 October 2026.
2026-09-22Pending
Zhejiang Dingli Machinery Co. v. United States, Ct. No. 24-00221-MMB (Ct. Int'l Trade 2026)In the U.S. Court of International Trade, Judge M. Miller Baker ordered a Chinese exporter to substantiate brief statements that Commerce took part in a Canadian antidumping case. If it cannot, it must show cause why it or its counsel, Grunfeld Desiderio, should not be sanctioned, and declare who or what, including AI, wrote them.
2026-09-08Warning
Carter v. City of BuffaloIn the US District Court for the Western District of New York, self-represented plaintiff Zakkiyya Carter used case law the court said did not support her propositions, after an earlier screening order. Judge John L. Sinatra Jr. believed AI may have prepared the amended complaint and warned future misuse could trigger sanctions.
2026-09-08Warning
G.P. v. Jose Hernandez ArevaloIn the US District Court for the Western District of Washington, plaintiff's counsel cited a nonexistent federal case in briefing against Turo. Judge Evanson described the citation as likely AI-fabricated, compelled arbitration, stayed the case and warned that fabricated authorities and missed deadlines fell below professional standards.
2026-09-03Pending
Falkenstein v. NilesIn the US District Court for the Central District of California, defence counsel filed materials with false quotations, misplaced propositions and representations not found in the complaint. Judge Blumenfeld ordered counsel to explain the AI certifications, which portions used AI, and what verification steps were taken.
2026-08-28Fine
Booker v. The Kroger Co.The US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia fined employment plaintiff's lawyer Christopher Johnson USD 8,000, payable to the court's sanctions fund, for citing four nonexistent or misrepresented authorities. Judge Grimberg found his show-cause response evasive and an attempt to shift blame to opposing counsel, required proof of ethics and technology CLE, and reserved further sanctions.
SafeLegalAIrecords: safelegalai.com/tracker/us-federal · CC BY 4.0 · not advice · no warranty