A public library of attorney and law-firm AI-citation incidents, each linked to a public source. Presented as risk intelligence only — not legal advice, accusations, or characterizations by CiteVerified.
Matter: Mata v. Avianca
Consequence: $5,000 total sanction; court found bad faith and ordered notice to falsely named judges.
What failed: Six fictitious ChatGPT-generated case citations were included in a legal brief.
CiteVerified angle: A single unverified chatbot research pass became a national ethics story.
Public source →Matter: People v. Crabill
Consequence: One year and one day suspension, with 90 days served and the balance stayed on probation terms.
What failed: ChatGPT-generated authorities were filed without reading or verifying the cases.
CiteVerified angle: Citation errors can become disciplinary exposure, especially when not corrected cleanly.
Public source →Matter: Middle District of Florida disciplinary matter
Consequence: Suspended from practicing in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida for one year.
What failed: Pleadings contained frivolous arguments based on fabricated cases, with possible AI involvement acknowledged.
CiteVerified angle: Courts treat the verification duty as personal and nondelegable.
Public source →Matter: Utah Court of Appeals ChatGPT brief
Consequence: Ordered to pay respondent fees, refund client fees tied to the filing, and donate $1,000 to a legal nonprofit.
What failed: A filing included false citations and a nonexistent case, with material obtained from ChatGPT.
CiteVerified angle: Delegating a draft to staff does not delegate the lawyer’s verification duty.
Public source →Matter: Wadsworth v. Walmart Inc. and Jetson Electric Bikes
Consequence: Ayala: pro hac vice revoked and $3,000 sanction; Morgan and Goody: $1,000 each.
What failed: Eight nonexistent cases generated through an in-house AI platform appeared in motions in limine.
CiteVerified angle: An internal AI tool is still not a cite checker.
Public source →Matter: Coomer v. Lindell / MyPillow defamation litigation
Consequence: $3,000 sanction against each attorney.
What failed: Court filing contained numerous incorrect or nonexistent citations and AI-related deficiencies.
CiteVerified angle: Judges are now looking for AI fingerprints when citations collapse.
Public source →Matter: Johnson v. Dunn
Consequence: Reprimand, state bar referral, disqualification of two partners, and required circulation of the order.
What failed: AI-generated citations were included without independent verification.
CiteVerified angle: The sanction can spread beyond the case: clients, judges, opposing counsel, and the whole firm may be notified.
Public source →Matter: California Court of Appeal filing / Noland-related reporting
Consequence: $10,000 fine for a frivolous appeal and fake case material.
What failed: Court identified 21 of 23 quotations in an opening brief as fake.
CiteVerified angle: Fabricated quotations are as dangerous as fabricated case names.
Public source →Matter: Lacey v. State Farm General Insurance Co.
Consequence: $31,100 fee/payment order for AI-generated citation errors.
What failed: Inaccurate citations and quotations stemming from AI research made a special master feel misled.
CiteVerified angle: BigLaw pedigree does not immunize a defective citation chain.
Public source →Matter: Whiting v. City of Athens
Consequence: $15,000 punitive sanction against each attorney, plus reimbursement of appeal fees and double costs.
What failed: More than two dozen fake citations and misrepresentations appeared in appellate filings.
CiteVerified angle: Appellate courts are applying serious monetary pressure for false authority.
Public source →Matter: Puerto Rico Soccer League v. FIFA-related litigation
Consequence: More than $24,400 in legal fees awarded to opposing firms.
What failed: At least 55 defective citations appeared in filings; court said volume suggested AI involvement despite denials.
CiteVerified angle: Even denied AI use can be inferred from the scale and pattern of citation failures.
Public source →Matter: Uprise fiber-project litigation in Nevada state court
Consequence: Choice between $2,500 each plus removal/bar referral or corrective letters and professional-conduct talks.
What failed: At least 14 citations appeared fictitious, misquoted, or misrepresented after ChatGPT-assisted drafting.
CiteVerified angle: Judges are designing reputational sanctions, not just financial ones.
Public source →Matter: Lexos Media IP LLC v. Overstock.com Inc.
Consequence: $12,000 combined sanctions; individual fines of $5,000, $3,000, $3,000, and $1,000.
What failed: Nonexistent quotations and case citations generated by ChatGPT were filed without verification by signatories.
CiteVerified angle: Every signer owns the citation defects, not just the lawyer who prompted the tool.
Public source →Matter: Fletcher v. Experian Info Solutions
Consequence: $2,500 appellate sanction.
What failed: The Fifth Circuit identified 21 fabrications or serious misrepresentations in a brief.
CiteVerified angle: Evasion after discovery can make the sanction worse.
Public source →Matter: Federal prosecutor brief in veterans’ health benefits litigation
Consequence: Public reprimand after job loss and other professional consequences.
What failed: A brief contained made-up quotes and false legal citations from a generative AI drafting process.
CiteVerified angle: Government lawyers and private lawyers face the same verification rule.
Public source →Matter: Alabama Supreme Court trust appeal
Consequence: Appeal dismissed as frivolous; future filings barred unless another licensed lawyer co-signs.
What failed: Filings cited dozens of nonexistent or misrepresented cases and quotations from an AI research tool.
CiteVerified angle: The client can lose the appeal because counsel did not verify the authorities.
Public source →Matter: Williams v. Honl
Consequence: Filing struck and about $8,000 in legal fees ordered.
What failed: An Oregon appellate brief contained fabricated quotations and other errors after generative AI use.
CiteVerified angle: Disclosure and correction matter, but the cost of cleanup can still shift to counsel.
Public source →Matter: Heimkes v. Fairhope Motorcoach Resort Condo. Owners Ass’n
Consequence: Reprimand, publication/notice requirements, bar referral, and $55,597 fee award.
What failed: Several pleadings contained fabricated citations and false statements of law that were not corrected.
CiteVerified angle: False citations can trigger cascading notice obligations and competency findings.
Public source →Matter: Nora v. M & A Transport, Inc.
Consequence: $1,000 personally payable sanction, AI CLE, and disciplinary committee referral.
What failed: Fabricated AI-generated cases were cited and the origin of the citations was misrepresented.
CiteVerified angle: A false explanation can be as damaging as the original bad citation.
Public source →Matter: Oregon Court of Appeals brief with false citations
Consequence: $10,000 sanction.
What failed: Opening brief contained at least 15 false citations and nine fabricated quotations.
CiteVerified angle: Courts are turning citation defects into per-violation monetary formulas.
Public source →Matter: ByoPlanet / Johansson-related eight-case sanctions order
Consequence: Severe sanctions across eight related cases, reported as exceeding $85,000 in penalties/fee exposure.
What failed: Repeated use of AI-generated fabricated citations and quotations even after notice.
CiteVerified angle: Once warned, every later unverified filing becomes aggravation.
Public source →Matter: Nebraska Supreme Court divorce appeal
Consequence: Temporary suspension pending investigation and disciplinary process.
What failed: Brief reportedly had problems in 57 of 63 references; AI use was later admitted after initial denial.
CiteVerified angle: A brief can become a public disciplinary hearing in real time.
Public source →Matter: Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio / Oregon sanctions reporting
Consequence: $2,000 sanction; $500 per fabricated citation and $1,000 for a fabricated quotation.
What failed: Two fabricated citations and a fabricated quotation appeared in a brief.
CiteVerified angle: Per-citation sanction math makes verification a cheap insurance policy.
Public source →Matter: Wilkes v. Canyons School District
Consequence: $7,000 sanction and CLE requirements.
What failed: Nonexistent case law was cited; the court found Rule 11 responsibilities violated for failure to verify existence and accuracy.
CiteVerified angle: A pre-filing existence check would have identified the problem before the court did.
Public source →Matter: Geddes v. LoanCare, LLC
Consequence: $1,000 sanction and service of order on the California Bar Association.
What failed: Manufactured quotes and misrepresentations appeared in a filing; court raised concern about generative AI use without adequate diligence.
CiteVerified angle: A quote audit is not optional when language is attributed to a case.
Public source →Matter: Couvrette v. Wisnovsky
Consequence: Errant briefs struck, plaintiffs’ claims dismissed, lead lawyer fined $15,500, and adverse costs imposed.
What failed: Fifteen AI-generated fake case citations and eight fabricated quotations appeared across three briefs.
CiteVerified angle: Record cleanup after filing can cost more than the case.
Public source →Matter: San Francisco federal employment discovery filing
Consequence: Managing partner admonished, fined $1,001, and ordered to complete training on supervising attorneys and ethical AI use; junior lawyer had previously been sanctioned.
What failed: A court brief contained a false case citation after AI-assisted research; the court emphasized supervisory responsibility for checking citations.
CiteVerified angle: Supervising lawyers can be sanctioned for citation defects produced downstream by junior lawyers or AI-assisted workflows.
Public source →Counts and entries reflect public reporting and may change as sources are updated. Review each underlying source and your own counsel before relying on any item. See our Legal Disclaimer.
A single human verification pass is the cheapest insurance against a citation that becomes a headline.