Incident Tracker / United States (state)
Vargas v. MTA Bus Co.
·Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County·US-STATENoted, no consequenceprovisional
On 2026-06-12, in Vargas v. MTA Bus Co, Supreme Court of New York amended its prior order and declined to attribute the non-existent citations in duplicated opposition papers to appellate counsel. Counsel filed opposition papers using nonexistent or hallucinated authorities.
- Court
- Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County
- Date
- 2026-06-12
- Who used the AI
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- Not identified in the record
- Conduct
- Paez Rodriguez’s opposition papers contained citations to non-existent cases, but the proposition of law was true. The court expressly did not attribute the citations to appellate counsel and imposed no consequence.
- 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
- 2026-09-07
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
- 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, “Vargas v. MTA Bus Co.”, safelegalai.com/tracker/vargas-v-mta-bus-co (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.