Skip to content

Incident Tracker / United States (state)

Hulvat v. Gumina

·Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District·US-STATECosts orderprovisional

On 2026-04-09, Illinois Appellate Court, Third District denied dismissal and striking of the appellate brief but awarded appellees $3,178 in attorney fees for responding to the AI-produced brief. A self-represented party submitted an appellate brief with multiple false quotations, fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities, including In re Marriage of Lehr.

Court
Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District
Date
2026-04-09
Who used the AI
Litigant in person
AI tool
Not identified in the record
Conduct
Hulvat’s pro se initial brief cited nine nonexistent cases and fictitious holdings; he acknowledged that the improper citations resulted from using generative AI and filed an amended brief.
Outcome
Costs order
Penalty
US$3,178
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

  • Tapscott v. Fariss, No. 25-1666 (Iowa Ct. App. 2026)2026-10-07 · Court of Appeals of Iowa · DismissalIn the Court of Appeals of Iowa, a self-represented appellant's final brief in a protective-order appeal contained multiple hallucinated case citations. After two earlier briefs were struck and the appellant failed to a…
  • Washington v. Justice, No. 2D2025-2678 (Fla. 2d DCA 2026)2026-10-07 · District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District · DismissalIn Florida's Second District Court of Appeal, self-represented appellants filed a brief citing eleven cases the court could not find and likely generated by AI. After an unavailing show-cause response and a pattern of f…
  • Shannon v. Shannon, 322 Neb. 451 (2026), No. S-25-5462026-10-02 · Nebraska Supreme Court · Filing struckIn Nebraska, the state Supreme Court struck a self-represented divorce litigant's appellate brief for fictitious citations produced by his admitted AI use. Extending Prososki v. Regan to unrepresented parties, it held s…
  • R. M. v. Mohr, 353 Or App 182 (2026), A1880922026-09-23 · Oregon Court of Appeals · FineIn Oregon, the Court of Appeals ordered a self-represented restraining-order appellant to pay $250 after his brief cited three fabricated cases he admitted came from AI. The court had threatened $1,500, at $500 per fake…

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Hulvat v. Gumina”, safelegalai.com/tracker/robert-s-hulvat-v-juli-gumina-stg-divorce-law-and-jennifer-b-hulvat (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.

Report an issue with this record →