Skip to content

Incident Tracker / United States (state)

Prisbrey v. Prisbrey

·Utah Court of Appeals·US-STATENoted, no consequenceprovisional

On 2026-03-19, Utah Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial while criticizing counsel’s incorrect Utah citations, misquotations, and authorities made out of whole cloth. Counsel submitted an appellate brief with seven fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities.

Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Date
2026-03-19
Who used the AI
Lawyer
AI tool
Not identified in the record
Conduct
Both appellate briefs contained incorrect, unrelated, nonexistent, or misquoted authorities; in Leona's argument section only one of seven Utah-case citations was correct.
Outcome
Noted, no consequence
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
2026-09-08

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

  • 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…
  • Lisandrillo v. Palozzi, No. 4D2026-2262 (Fla. 4th DCA)2026-09-16 · District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District · PendingIn Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal, petitioner's counsel Jaclyn R. Soroka filed an emergency writ petition and related filings the court suspected contained AI-generated components, including convoluted false…
  • State ex rel. Schnell v. Richardson, No. ED114731 (Mo. Ct. App.)2026-09-08 · Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District · SanctionsIn the Missouri Court of Appeals, relator's counsel Jenna Rohr Conley admitted using generative AI to research a mandamus petition and failing to verify two cases that did not exist. The court denied the writ and impose…

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Prisbrey v. Prisbrey”, safelegalai.com/tracker/prisbrey-v-prisbrey (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.

Report an issue with this record →