Incident Tracker / United States (state)
Barber v. Morawa
·Michigan Court of Appeals·US-STATECosts orderprovisional
The Michigan Court of Appeals affirms denial of Joyce Barber’s new-trial motion but sanctions her counsel for AI-related citation failures. The court holds that repeated fabricated and unsupported authorities violated Michigan court rules, remands to determine defendant’s actual damages and expenses, and refers counsel for possible investigation.
- Court
- Michigan Court of Appeals
- Date
- 2026-06-17
- Who used the AI
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- artificial intelligence research tools
- Conduct
- Plaintiff’s counsel repeatedly filed fabricated and unsupported authorities generated or revised with artificial intelligence, despite defendant identifying the defects.
- Outcome
- Costs order
- Penalty
- No monetary penalty recorded
- Regulatory outcome
- No separate regulatory disposition recorded
- Status
- Provisional — written by the court-decisions pipeline, awaiting the editor
- Last checked
- 2026-09-07
Primary sources for this incident
Related regulation records for this incident
No related regulation record has been linked to this incident yet.
Similar incidents on the record
- Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., No. 24-CV-1099 (D.C. Ct. App.)2026-09-03 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Regulatory referralIn the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Deutsche Bank's appellee brief cited four nonexistent authorities after counsel used Google's generative AI search tool without verification. The court struck the brief, ref…
- Kiser v. DeSimone Auto Group, No. 2428 EDA 2025 (Pa. Super. Ct.)2026-08-27 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · WarningIn Pennsylvania, counsel for Paige and Ty Kiser cited a non-existent Superior Court decision, Com. v. Reid, for an appellate issue in a consumer dispute. The Superior Court called the authority counterfeit, suggested ch…
- Benjamin v. State, No. 2189 Sept. Term 2024 (Md. App. Ct.)2026-08-25 · Appellate Court of Maryland · WarningIn Maryland, appellate counsel filed a criminal brief with multiple inaccurate citations. The Appellate Court compared the problem to Mezu, said fake AI-generated cases are improper, accepted counsel's corrective effort…
- LPC Commercial Services, LLC v. Ar-Razzaaq Properties, LLC, Record No. 1407-25-4 (Va. Ct. App.)2026-08-25 · Court of Appeals of Virginia · SanctionsIn Virginia, appellee's counsel in LPC Commercial Services filed a brief with 25 phantom quotations attributed to Virginia cases, which the Court of Appeals attributed to unchecked computer-assisted research. The court…
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Barber v. Morawa”, safelegalai.com/tracker/barber-v-morawa (accessed 2026-09-08). Data: CC BY 4.0.