Skip to content

Incident Tracker / United States (state)

In re Miller

·Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas·US-STATEWarningprovisional

The Texas Court of Appeals on 2026-04-23 warned counsel to verify legal authorities and cautioned that future hallucinated or nonexistent citations may bring sanctions in IN RE PAULA M. MILLER, Relator. Counsel filed a submission with one fabricated case citation and one false case quotation.

Court
Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas
Date
2026-04-23
Who used the AI
Lawyer
AI tool
Not identified in the record
Conduct
The mandamus petition had attributions and quotations to caselaw that the concurring chief justice said strongly appeared to be AI-fabricated hallucinations with fictitious or misleading citations.
Outcome
Warning
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

  • 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…
  • Kid International, LLC v. City National Bank of Florida, No. 4D2025-2599 (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)2026-10-07 · District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District · SanctionsIn Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal, counsel for Kid International filed an AI-assisted brief citing a hallucinated case seven times and fabricated quotations from real authorities. The court affirmed on the me…
  • Cervantes v. Bianco, No. S295866 (Cal. Sept. 24, 2026)2026-09-24 · Supreme Court of California · Regulatory referralIn California, the state Supreme Court disapproved the improper use of AI tools in the Riverside County sheriff's briefing in a ballot-seizure writ case, after the law firm misquoted Common Cause v. Board of Supervisors…

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “In re Miller”, safelegalai.com/tracker/in-re-paula-m-miller-relator (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.

Report an issue with this record →