P. M. M. c/ G. A., F. M. D. S.H. s/ cobro ordinario de sumas de dinero, Causa MO-14691-2021 (RS-722-2026)
In Argentina, a Buenos Aires provincial appeals chamber in Morón declared a fee appeal deserted, with costs, because it rested on a Supreme Court precedent that could not be found. The court said likely AI hallucination was the probable cause, warned counsel and asked the local bar association to remind members to verify AI-generated citations.
- Court
- Cámara de Apelación en lo Civil y Comercial, Sala II, Departamento Judicial Morón (Buenos Aires Province)
- Date
- 2026-10-01
- Who used the AI
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- Generative AI (suspected)
- Conduct
- A mediator's appeal against a fee-base ruling was built almost entirely on a Supreme Court of Buenos Aires precedent cited as "Colegio de Abogados de La Plata c/ Provincia de Buenos Aires" ("Barrio"), 5 May 2021, C. 121.461, with a quoted summary. The court could not locate the decision, the case or the summary; case number C. 121.461 belongs to an unrelated bankruptcy matter.
- Outcome
- Dismissal
- Penalty
- No monetary penalty recorded
- Regulatory outcome
- No separate regulatory disposition recorded
- Status
- Verified against listed sources
- Last checked
- 2026-10-05
What was fabricated or misused
- "Colegio de Abogados de La Plata c/ Provincia de Buenos Aires" ("Barrio"), SCBA, 05/05/2021 — no such decision or case could be located
- Quoted summary attributed to SCBA C. 121.461 (05/05/2021) — the number belongs to an unrelated bankruptcy case last active in 2017, and the summary does not appear in the JUBA database
What the court said
“Pero sucede que, intentando localizarlo, no pude ubicar ni el fallo que se menciona (y en base al cual se argumenta) ni siquiera la causa (lo intenté con la carátula y también el número de causa).”
“Es decir, en este lapso de tiempo, hemos detectado dos situaciones de alucinaciones derivadas del posible uso de IA, con una mención incorrecta a un fallo conocido, y reiteradamente evocado, de la SCBA.”
“Considero que este tipo de error podría ser más grave aún que la invención de un precedente dictado en un caso totalmente inexistente.”
Timeline
- First-instance civil and commercial court set the fee base.
- The mediator filed the appeal memorial citing the untraceable precedent.
- Sala II declared the appeal deserted with costs, notified counsel and directed a communication to the departmental bar association.
Why this case matters
The chamber noted this was the second time in a short period that a filing before the Morón chambers had invoked a false precedent linked by name to the well-known SCBA "Barrios" decision; the first was decided by Sala I in MO-19435-2020. The judge argued that a fake citation borrowing a famous case name is harder to catch than an invented one. The communication to the bar association asks it to spread a warning, and is not a disciplinary referral.
Practice note
Counsel citing a well-known precedent should open the decision in the official MEV or JUBA systems and check that the case number, date and summary match. The court specifically warned about AI-generated answers, including Google's AI overview, that attach a familiar case name to a proposition. An appeal memorial built on one unverified precedent risks being declared deserted.
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
- Eric Posey v. Summer Bushnell, Docket No. 52072 (Idaho 2026)2026-09-22 · Idaho Supreme Court · WarningIn Idaho, the state supreme court affirmed Eric Posey's defamation judgment after finding Summer Bushnell's pro se appellate briefing relied on fabricated or inaccurate quotations and possibly unverified AI output. The…
- Yichang District Court (Hubei), 'non-drug passed off as drug' criminal case (AI-fabricated defence materials)2026-07-21 · District court, Yichang City, Hubei Province · WarningIn one of the first reported instances in China, a district court judge in Yichang, Hubei Province, checked the defence's reference materials and found AI-fabricated cases with fake China Judgments Online links and doct…
- Bethany Cingel v. Gregory Ferreri (Ind. Ct. App. 2025), No. 25A-DC-005002025-09-19 · Court of Appeals of Indiana · WarningThe Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed against a self-represented appellant in a domestic-relations appeal whose brief cited 23 authorities, 14 of them nonexistent, finding she had likely used generative AI. The court ca…
- Kurt Williams v. Karin Kirch (Ind. Ct. App. 2025), No. 25A-SC-001962025-08-18 · Court of Appeals of Indiana · WarningThe Indiana Court of Appeals admonished a self-represented appellant who cited fictitious authorities the court found were likely produced by generative AI. Because the opposing party sought no sanction, the court impos…
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “P. M. M. c/ G. A., F. M. D. S.H. s/ cobro ordinario de sumas de dinero, Causa MO-14691-2021 (RS-722-2026)”, safelegalai.com/tracker/pmm-v-ga-moron-2026 (accessed 2026-10-05). Data: CC BY 4.0.