Incident Tracker / United States (federal)
Williams v. Chicago Board of Education
·United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois·US-FEDPendingprovisional
On 2026-03-30, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ordered counsel to file a statement explaining the nonexistent quotations, the Engquist misstatement, and whether the same source caused other errors. Counsel submitted a response brief with two false quotations, fabricated or nonexistent authorities and mischaracterized authorities.
- Court
- United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
- Date
- 2026-03-30
- Who used the AI
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- Not identified in the record
- Conduct
- Williams's response brief contained two nonexistent quotations attributed to EEOC v. University of Chicago Hospitals and Doe v. Village of Arlington Heights, cited Engquist for a class-of-one theory even though it held public employees cannot bring such claims, and misrepresented other holdings.
- 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
- 2026-09-08
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
- Zhejiang Dingli Machinery Co. v. United States, Ct. No. 24-00221-MMB (Ct. Int'l Trade 2026)2026-09-22 · United States Court of International Trade · PendingIn the U.S. Court of International Trade, Judge M. Miller Baker ordered a Chinese exporter to substantiate brief statements that Commerce took part in a Canadian antidumping case. If it cannot, it must show cause why it…
- Falkenstein v. Niles, No. 2:26-cv-07078-SB-PD (C.D. Cal.)2026-09-03 · US District Court, Central District of California · PendingIn the US District Court for the Central District of California, defence counsel filed materials with false quotations, misplaced propositions and representations not found in the complaint. Judge Blumenfeld ordered cou…
- James v. Conley, No. 1:23-cv-24467 (S.D. Fla.)2026-08-27 · US District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Magistrate Judge Elfenbein, report and recommendation) · PendingIn the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, a magistrate judge found that plaintiff's Fifth Amended Complaint pleaded nonexistent police-training publications that counsel conceded were AI hallucinati…
- Hill v. Foundation Media LLC, No. 1:25-cv-05947 (AS) (S.D.N.Y. 2026)2026-09-29 · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · WarningIn New York federal court, Judge Arun Subramanian ordered defence counsel to explain AI-affected quotations in a response brief, took no further action, and called the episode a wakeup call. Counsel's 1 October letter d…
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Williams v. Chicago Board of Education”, safelegalai.com/tracker/williams-v-chicago-board-of-education (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.