Skip to content

Incident Tracker / United States (federal)

Estate of Khallid Muhammad v. Tupac Shakur Estate

·United States District Court for the Central District of California·US-FEDPendingprovisional

Central District of California on 2026-02-26 in Estate of Khallid Muhammad et al v. Tupac Shakur Estate et al found counsel's response contained two citation defects involving nonexistent authorities, fabricated or misattributed quotations, mischaracterized authority. The court ordered counsel to show cause why sanctions, striking, or referral should not issue for the defective authorities.

Court
United States District Court for the Central District of California
Date
2026-02-26
Who used the AI
Lawyer
AI tool
Not identified in the record
Conduct
Plaintiffs' opposition contained citations to non-existent authority; their response confirmed one citation did not correspond to any publicly retrievable decision and mischaracterized another state-court case.
Outcome
Pending
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

  • Zhejiang Dingli Machinery Co. v. United States, Ct. No. 24-00221-MMB (Ct. Int'l Trade 2026)2026-09-22 · United States Court of International Trade · PendingIn 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…
  • Falkenstein v. Niles, No. 2:26-cv-07078-SB-PD (C.D. Cal.)2026-09-03 · US District Court, Central District of California · PendingIn 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 cou…
  • James v. Conley, No. 1:23-cv-24467 (S.D. Fla.)2026-08-27 · US District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Magistrate Judge Elfenbein, report and recommendation) · PendingIn the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, a magistrate judge found that plaintiff's Fifth Amended Complaint pleaded nonexistent police-training publications that counsel conceded were AI hallucinati…
  • Hill v. Foundation Media LLC, No. 1:25-cv-05947 (AS) (S.D.N.Y. 2026)2026-09-29 · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · WarningIn 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 d…

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Estate of Khallid Muhammad v. Tupac Shakur Estate”, safelegalai.com/tracker/estate-of-khallid-muhammad-et-al-v-tupac-shakur-estate-et-al (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.

Report an issue with this record →