Incident Tracker

Ibach v. Stewart, No. SC-2025-0106 (Ala.)

sanctions

The Supreme Court of Alabama dismissed an appeal after finding plaintiffs' counsel W. Perry Hall filed briefs whose 'widespread and particularly egregious' improper use of AI produced dozens of non-existent and misquoted authorities. It ordered Hall to pay $17,200 plus double appellate costs, barred him from further unsigned filings, and referred him to the Alabama State Bar.

Date of decision/order

2026-04-24

Court

Supreme Court of Alabama

Jurisdiction

US-STATE

AI tool

Not identified in the record

Conduct

W. Perry Hall, appellate counsel for the plaintiffs (Ibach and Stewart) in a trust dispute, filed briefs the Court found were riddled with misquoted and non-existent legal authorities — fabricated cases and quotations attributed to real courts that do not exist. The Supreme Court of Alabama held that 'the improper use of AI in the plaintiffs' briefs was widespread and particularly egregious,' cataloguing dozens of fictitious citations across the opening and reply briefs.

Consequence

USD 17,200

Regulatory outcome

Alabama State Bar: The Supreme Court of Alabama referred Hall to the Alabama State Bar for potential discipline over possible violations of the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. No Bar disposition is yet on record. (2026-04-24)