Skip to content

Incident Tracker / United States (federal)

Leonard Colbert v. County of Riverside

·U.S. District Court for the Central District of California·US-FEDWarningprovisional

On 2026-03-31, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California admonished counsel after finding a false statutory quotation and no supporting case, federal or state, for the quoted language. Counsel submitted an opposition brief with multiple nonexistent or misstated legal provisions, false quotations and fabricated or nonexistent authorities, including Mata v. Avianca, Inc.

Court
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Date
2026-03-31
Who used the AI
Lawyer
AI tool
Not identified in the record
Conduct
The opposition brief used multiple nonexistent or misstated legal provisions, false quotations and fabricated or nonexistent authorities, including Mata v. Avianca, Inc, which the court found nonexistent, misquoted, or unsupported.
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

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Leonard Colbert v. County of Riverside”, safelegalai.com/tracker/leonard-colbert-v-county-of-riverside (accessed 2026-09-08). Data: CC BY 4.0.

Report an issue with this record →