Incident Tracker / United States (state)
Mohamed Hussain et al. v. Mansoor Quraishi et al.
·Connecticut Superior Court·US-STATEPendingprovisional
On 2026-03-31, Connecticut Superior Court considered the special motion to dismiss without the AI-generated portions and required counsel to explain the use and extent of AI in the brief. Counsel submitted a complaint with multiple false quotations, fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities.
- Court
- Connecticut Superior Court
- Date
- 2026-03-31
- Who used the AI
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- Not identified in the record
- Conduct
- The complaint used multiple false quotations, fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities that the court found nonexistent, misquoted, or unsupported for the propositions asserted.
- 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
- Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., No. 24-CV-1099 (D.C. Ct. App.)2026-09-03 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Regulatory referralIn the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Deutsche Bank's appellee brief cited four nonexistent authorities after counsel used Google's generative AI search tool without verification. The court struck the brief, ref…
- 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…
- LPC Commercial Services, LLC v. Ar-Razzaaq Properties, LLC, Record No. 1407-25-4 (Va. Ct. App.)2026-08-25 · Court of Appeals of Virginia · SanctionsIn Virginia, appellee's counsel in LPC Commercial Services filed a brief with 25 phantom quotations attributed to Virginia cases, which the Court of Appeals attributed to unchecked computer-assisted research. The court…
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Mohamed Hussain et al. v. Mansoor Quraishi et al.”, safelegalai.com/tracker/mohamed-hussain-et-al-v-mansoor-quraishi-et-al (accessed 2026-09-08). Data: CC BY 4.0.