AI sanctions tracker
The court record on AI hallucinations.
Court decisions worldwide on fabricated or misrepresented AI output in filings. Scored for severity, updated weekly.
Tools named in the record
Off the shelf is not off the hook.
Show more
Search the record.
Filter by party, country, or outcome. Any filtered view can be shared as a link.
Embed this tracker on your site| Details | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 1, 2026 | P. M. M. c/ G. A., F. M. d. S.H. s/ cobro ordinario de sumas de dineroCA Morón · Oct 1, 2026 | Argentina | Lawyer | Inferred |
| Disciplinary referral; Case or appeal dismissed | None | 5 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 30, 2026 | Terrence Jamal Fitch v. Educators Credit Union and Landmark Credit UnionCA Wisconsin · Sep 30, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Warning or admonishment | None | 1 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 30, 2026 | Ambrose v. ParlatoD. Connecticut · Sep 30, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Warning or admonishment | None | 1 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 30, 2026 | Nantongo v. Nationwide Mortgage Bankers Inc.E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2026 | USA | Lawyer | Inferred |
| No sanction recordedAlleged | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 30, 2026 | Jackson v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.E.D. Michigan · Sep 30, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 30, 2026 | United States v. Charles Randall SorensenD. Minnesota · Sep 30, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Warning or admonishment | None | 1 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 30, 2026 | Miller v. Colorado Department of RevenueD. Colorado · Sep 30, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Show cause or pending | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 30, 2026 | Ambrose v. SwithinD. Connecticut · Sep 30, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Warning or admonishment | None | 1 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 30, 2026 | Sexton v. Department of Homeless Services, et al.S.D. New York · Sep 30, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Warning or admonishment | None | 1 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 29, 2026 | Rhyu v. FrostCA Illinois · Sep 29, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 29, 2026 | Tijerino v. Spotify USA Inc.S.D. New York · Sep 29, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Lex |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 29, 2026 | Curran v. Mom's Organic Market, Inc. et al.D. Maryland · Sep 29, 2026 | USA | Lawyer | Inferred |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 29, 2026 | Garcia v. City of Monte Vista, Colorado et al.D. Colorado · Sep 29, 2026 | USA | Lawyer | Tool not named |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 28, 2026 | Williams v. Federal Aviation Administration et al.D. Connecticut · Sep 28, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Show cause or pending | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 28, 2026 | Ahmed v. Minister of Citizenship and ImmigrationFederal Court · Sep 28, 2026 | Canada | Lawyer | Inferred |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 28, 2026 | Orlando Chechitelli v. Etiwanda School District, et al.C.D. California · Sep 28, 2026 | USA | Lawyer | Inferred |
| Show cause or pending | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 28, 2026 | Anderson v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.S.D. Indiana · Sep 28, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Not stated |
| Warning or admonishment | None | 1 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 28, 2026 | The Louisiana Community Development Capital Fund, Inc. et al. v. Choice Hotels International, Inc.M.D. Louisiana · Sep 28, 2026 | USA | Lawyer | Inferred |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 28, 2026 | Verduzco v. Con Agra Foods Packaged Foods, LLCE.D. California · Sep 28, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Filing struck | None | 2 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 28, 2026 | Williams v. Dimaanno et al.E.D. California · Sep 28, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| Warning or admonishment | None | 1 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 25, 2026 | Coyne v. SmurlLackawanna CCCP · Sep 25, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 25, 2026 | Aguilar v. The Crawford Group, Inc.D. Massachusetts · Sep 25, 2026 | USA | Lawyer | Tool not named |
| Suspension or disqualification; Adverse costs | 10,000 USD* | 5 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 24, 2026 | Turner v. Casey's Retail Company et al.N.D. Illinois · Sep 24, 2026 | USA | Lawyer | Inferred |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 24, 2026 | Robinson v. Dikeland Sewer DistrictW.D. Missouri · Sep 24, 2026 | USA | Pro se | Inferred |
| No sanction recorded | None | 0 of 5 | Decision | |
| Sep 24, 2026 | Koeberer v. Weir, et al.6th Cir. CA · Sep 24, 2026 | USA | Lawyer | Inferred |
| Warning or admonishment | None | 1 of 5 | Decision |
The patternCases by quarter, who filed, severity, and jurisdictions
Cases by quarter of decision
All parties. 2026 Q4 runs to Oct 5, 2026, and recent decisions reach the source with a lag.
View as table
| Quarter | Lawyer | Pro se | Other | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 Q2 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 |
| 2023 Q3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| 2023 Q4 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 7 |
| 2024 Q1 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 10 |
| 2024 Q2 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 7 |
| 2024 Q3 | 7 | 12 | 0 | 19 |
| 2024 Q4 | 9 | 14 | 2 | 25 |
| 2025 Q1 | 22 | 31 | 4 | 57 |
| 2025 Q2 | 60 | 61 | 2 | 123 |
| 2025 Q3 | 121 | 141 | 7 | 269 |
| 2025 Q4 | 152 | 243 | 11 | 406 |
| 2026 Q1 | 177 | 269 | 7 | 453 |
| 2026 Q2 | 161 | 246 | 10 | 417 |
| 2026 Q3 | 138 | 197 | 11 | 346 |
| 2026 Q4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Who filed it
Share of all cases by the party responsible for the filing. Lawyers account for 63% of sanctions.
Severity of the most serious outcome
Scored 0 to 5 on the rubric in the methodology. Sanctions are 2 and above.
Where sanctions land
Sanctions by country, top 8.
Embed
Add the tracker to your site.
Publications, bar associations, and law schools can embed a live, filtered view of the tracker. It updates with each weekly import, credits the source, and takes one snippet.
Build your embedLive example: compact list, latest sanctions
Methodology
How the tracker is built.
Built on the AI Hallucination Cases Database by Damien Charlotin (CC BY 4.0). We normalize outcomes, score severity on the rubric below, and remove the source's summaries. Decision links open the source's copy of the court document.
A sanction is an outcome scoring 2 or higher where the court found the fabrication. Warnings count as cases, not sanctions.
The AI tool column names the tool as the court record does, legal research products included. Monetary penalties are shown in the currency stated; where the source gives none, it is inferred from the court's country and marked. Inferred in the AI tool column means the court concluded AI was used without an admission. Updated weekly.
| Score | Level | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Standing or case | Contempt, suspension or disqualification, pro hac vice revoked, disciplinary referral, dismissal with prejudice |
| 4 | Money or restriction | Monetary sanction or fine, filing restriction |
| 3 | Costs or reprimand | Adverse costs or fee award, public reprimand |
| 2 | Filing-level | Filing struck, CLE or training ordered |
| 1 | On the record | Warning or admonishment, arguments disregarded, notice or certification order, case or appeal dismissed on other grounds |
| 0 | None yet | Order to show cause or other pending step, or no sanction recorded |
FAQ
Common questions.
What counts as a sanction on this tracker?
A case counts as a sanction when its most severe outcome scores 2 or higher on the severity rubric and the fabrication was found by the court, not merely alleged. Warnings count as cases, not sanctions.
Where does the case data come from?
From the AI Hallucination Cases Database by Damien Charlotin, licensed CC BY 4.0. OurFirm.ai normalizes the fields, assigns sanction categories and severity scores, and removes the source's summaries.
How often is the tracker updated?
Weekly. The last-updated date at the top of the page is the date of the most recent data import.
Why do some cases list the AI tool as Inferred?
Inferred means the court concluded generative AI was used even though no one admitted it, usually because the citations fail in the pattern AI output does. Tool not named means AI use was admitted but the specific tool was not identified.
Can I embed the tracker on my site?
Yes. The embed builder produces a snippet for a table, cards, a compact list, or a stats counter, filtered by party, country, outcome, and date. It updates weekly and credits the source.
Check My Cites
Verify every cite before the court does.
Check My Cites independently retrieves, reads, and verifies every citation in the brief. Fix what it flags or accept in one click.