Incident Tracker / United States (federal)
Gamez v. County of Fresno
·U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California·US-FEDPendingprovisional
On 2026-04-06, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California ordered counsel to show cause why sanctions should not issue for an opposition brief with nonexistent authority, fabricated quotations, and unsupported legal assertions. Counsel submitted an opposition brief with nonexistent or misstated legal provisions, false quotations, fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities.
- Court
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
- Date
- 2026-04-06
- Who used the AI
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- Not identified in the record
- Conduct
- The opposition brief used nonexistent or misstated legal provisions, false quotations, fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities, including Noland v. Land of the Free, L.P and United States v. Hayes, which the court found nonexistent, misquoted, or unsupported.
- 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
- 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…
- Booker v. The Kroger Co., No. 1:26-cv-02006-SDG (N.D. Ga.)2026-08-28 · US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division · FineThe 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 authorit…
- Adams v. Matrix Providers, No. 1:23-cv-01996 (D. Colo.)2026-08-27 · US District Court for the District of Colorado · FineThe US District Court for the District of Colorado fined counsel Ms Pearson USD 1,000 after her brief cited a nonexistent case and attributed a quotation to Justice Scalia from an opinion dated 2020, four years after hi…
- Williams v. Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Board, No. 4:26-cv-00433-P (N.D. Tex.)2026-08-27 · US District Court, Northern District of Texas · WarningIn the Northern District of Texas, plaintiffs' counsel cited nonexistent and materially inapposite cases while trying to defeat qualified immunity. Judge Pittman called the effort borderline sanctionable, warned that ge…
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Gamez v. County of Fresno”, safelegalai.com/tracker/gamez-v-county-of-fresno (accessed 2026-09-08). Data: CC BY 4.0.