The full registry.
Every case file on record, verified and pending. Search it, or filter by department, industry, country, technology, and outcome.
Ontario Law Society Tribunal orders a lawyer to pay $31,150 in costs after Grok-generated fake citations
In Mazaheri v Law Society of Ontario (2026 ONLSTH 112), the Law Society Tribunal ordered a suspended lawyer to pay the regulator's full costs of $31,150 after he filed motion materials produced by generative AI (which he admitted was 'in particular Grok') that cited non-existent decisions and misused real ones.
OTG New York v. Ottogi America: a New Jersey federal court fines a lawyer $3,000 for a reply brief built on AI-hallucinated citations (2025)
In OTG New York, Inc.
Torres Campos v. Munoz: a published California appellate opinion sanctions a lawyer $5,000 for citing AI-hallucinated cases in a dog-custody fight (2026)
In In re the Domestic Partnership of Torres Campos & Munoz (Cal.
A federal court prices an unchecked AI legal workflow: $3,000 sanctions each for the attorneys behind an AI-drafted brief with nearly thirty defective citations
On July 7, 2025, Judge Nina Y.
€30.5 million for an illegal AI face database: the Dutch DPA's final, unappealable GDPR fine on Clearview AI
By decision of 16 May 2024, published 3 September 2024, the Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (Dutch Data Protection Authority) fined Clearview AI Inc.
iTutorGroup pays $365,000 after EEOC alleges its application software auto-rejected 200+ older applicants — the settlement the EEOC's Chair tied to its AI enforcement push
In EEOC v.
FTC final order: the 'AI-powered' web-accessibility widget that promised any-website WCAG compliance pays $1,000,000
On 21 April 2025 the FTC issued final consent order C-4817 against accessiBe Inc.
Federal court enters $25M judgment and permanent ban against Ascend Ecom after FTC alleges its 'AI-powered' passive-income storefronts earned clients virtually nothing
In FTC v.
FTC orders DoNotPay's 'world's first robot lawyer' to pay $193,000 and notify subscribers over unsubstantiated AI claims
The FTC's final Decision and Order (Docket C-4812, issued 14 January 2025, announced 11 February 2025) requires DoNotPay — which advertised its subscription chatbot as 'the world's first robot lawyer' — to pay $193,000 in monetary relief, notify 2021–2023 subscribers, and stop claiming its service performs like a real lawyer without evidence.
FTC v. Evolv: the AI scanner marketed as detecting all weapons missed a knife used in a school stabbing — a federal court entered a permanent injunction
On 5 December 2024 a federal court in Massachusetts entered a stipulated permanent injunction against Evolv Technologies (FTC v.
FTC × IntelliVision: a 'zero bias, millions of faces' AI claim, measured against NIST
IntelliVision sold facial recognition software advertising 'Zero gender or racial bias through model training with millions of faces'.
Federal court bans Rite Aid from AI facial-recognition surveillance for five years after FTC alleges thousands of false-positive matches
A stipulated order in FTC v.
FTC final order: the '98% accurate' AI Content Detector was an unmodified student model — its own published data showed 53.2% on real-world text
On 21 August 2025 the FTC issued final consent order C-4822 against Workado, LLC (f/k/a Content At Scale AI).
A $2.275M class settlement takes the algorithm's score away: Louis v. SafeRent and the five-year rollback of tenant-screening scores for voucher applicants
On 20 November 2024, Judge Angel Kelley of the U.S.
SEC AI-washing order: Presto's drive-thru 'voice AI' needed a human on every order
On 14 January 2025 the SEC entered a settled cease-and-desist order against Presto Automation, finding its drive-thru AI claims materially false: the original version of Presto's own voice AI 'required human agent intervention, including entering the order, in all instances' — off-site agents in the Philippines and India — while filings claimed it 'eliminat[es] human order taking' and reported 95%–99% automation rates that counted only restaurant-staff involvement.
SEC AI washing enforcement: Delphia and Global Predictions pay $400,000 for AI claims they couldn't back
The SEC's AI washing enforcement actions of 18 March 2024 fined two investment advisers a combined $400,000 — Delphia $225,000 and Global Predictions $175,000 — after finding their advertised artificial intelligence did not exist as claimed.
A Federal Court Fined a Public Defender $1,500 for a Fake Citation — and Refused to Say AI Wrote It
United States v.
John Deere See & Spray: independent university trials cut post-emergence herbicide 43–62%
Computer-vision targeted spraying, measured not by John Deere but by independent university weed scientists: a peer-reviewed Weed Technology study reports 28.4–62.4% post-emergence herbicide savings, a University of Arkansas 3-year trial reports 43–59%, and an independent Iowa State field study reports 76% average product savings — with an honestly documented resistant-weed tradeoff at low sensitivity settings.
Akerlund v. Atlas Air: a federal appeals court refers a former Florida lawmaker to its lawyer-conduct committee over AI-hallucinated citations — filed twice
In Akerlund v.
The UK's DWP fraud model: a machine-learning system that saved an estimated 4.4 million pounds on Universal Credit advances
Since May 2022 the UK Department for Work and Pensions has run a machine-learning model that flags potentially fraudulent Universal Credit advance claims for review.
Coinbase: AI spend cut nearly in half, and the biggest lever was caching, not cheaper models
In late June 2026, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said the company cut internal AI spending by nearly half while token usage sat near a company high.
Notion and Decagon: an AI support agent, 34% faster resolution and 2x deflection
Notion deployed Decagon's AI customer-experience agent to automate repetitive inquiries and route the rest to the right expert.
Delivery Hero and n8n: account-lockout recovery automated in a single workflow
Delivery Hero's global IT service delivery team automated employee account-lockout recovery with one n8n Enterprise workflow: the employee's manager approves, and API calls to Okta, Jira, and Google restore access.
JPMorgan's COIN: the famous 360,000-hours figure, and why it was never independently measured
JPMorgan built COIN (Contract Intelligence), an in-house machine-learning system that interprets commercial-loan agreements in seconds, work that Bloomberg reported in 2017 had consumed 360,000 hours a year by lawyers and loan officers.
Klarna's AI customer-service assistant: the 2024 numbers and the 2025 walk-back
Klarna's OpenAI-powered assistant handled two-thirds of customer-service chats in its first month (Feb 2024) and was said to do the equivalent work of 700 full-time agents, a modeled equivalence, not 700 layoffs.
Mango's first fully AI-generated campaign: Sunset Dream, 95 markets, and no public performance number
In July 2024 Mango ran what it calls its first campaign generated entirely with generative AI, for the Sunset Dream collection of its Mango Teen line, live in 95 markets.
Octopus Energy's 'Magic Ink': AI that drafts support emails, with no job cuts
Octopus Energy's Kraken 'Magic Ink' drafted customer-service email replies with a human reviewing and sending each one.
Moderna's company-wide ChatGPT Enterprise rollout: 750 custom GPTs, from a vendor case study
Moderna deployed OpenAI's ChatGPT Enterprise company-wide in April 2024 and reported 750 custom GPTs within two months, 120 conversations per user per week, and 100% adoption in its legal team.
Omega Healthcare and UiPath: document automation across billing, coding, and payer correspondence
Omega Healthcare, a healthcare revenue cycle management firm, has run UiPath automation for about five years across billing, medical coding, and insurance correspondence.
Otto's autonomous stock ordering: a deep-learning system that buys inventory on its own
German retailer Otto uses a Blue Yonder deep-learning system, built on an algorithm that originated at CERN, to forecast demand and automatically order stock.
PZU and Tractable: from a detailed review of 20% of body-shop claims to nearly all, in real time
PZU, the largest insurer in Central and Eastern Europe, deployed Tractable's computer-vision AI to review motor-damage claims from body shops.
TSXG Galicia: Spain's High Court of Justice of Galicia fines a lawyer €1,800 for an appeal built on 24 AI-fabricated citations — and sizes the fine to a legal-AI subscription
The Sala de lo Social of the Tribunal Superior de Xustiza de Galicia fined a lawyer €1,800 under article 75.4 LJS after his social-jurisdiction appeal was found to contain 24 fabricated jurisprudential citations (of 32, 75%), attributed to unverified generative-AI 'hallucinations', and referred him to the A Coruña Bar Association.
Zalando's 2018 'algorithms replace 250 marketing jobs': the headline, and the hiring plan it left out
In March 2018 Zalando said it would replace 200 to 250 marketing roles with algorithms and AI, a line cited for years as a clean AI-for-layoffs example.
Landberg v. City of New York — an AI-fabricated appellate brief drew $10,500 in sanctions
A New York appellate court (Second Department) sanctioned attorney Michael Sanders $8,000 and his law firm $2,500 — $10,500 total, to the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection — after an appellant's brief prepared with generative AI cited three nonexistent cases, fabricated Court of Appeals quotations contrary to the actual law, and misrepresented real cases (2026 NY Slip Op 03935, decided June 23, 2026).
Italy's Supreme Court fines an appellant €5,000 for AI-hallucinated case citations
In judgment no.
Barber v. Morawa: Michigan's first published appellate opinion sanctioning a lawyer for AI-fabricated citations
In Barber v.
Withers v. City of Aberdeen: a federal court sanctions attorneys on BOTH sides $8,000 for AI-hallucinated citations
In a June 8, 2026 Sanctions Order, U.S.
Alabama Supreme Court dismisses appeal, fines lawyer $17,200 for AI-'hallucinated' citations
In Ibach v.
United States v. Farris: a federal appeals court denies a lawyer his pay and removes him from the case over AI-fabricated quotations from Westlaw's CoCounsel
In United States v.
Prososki v. Regan: Nebraska Supreme Court strikes an appellate brief and refers counsel for discipline over fictitious, allegedly AI-generated citations
In a per curiam opinion filed March 20, 2026, the Nebraska Supreme Court struck the appellant's brief, dismissed the appeal, and referred appellant's counsel, W.
Whiting v. City of Athens: a federal appeals court fines two lawyers $15,000 each for briefs with 'over two dozen fake citations'
In consolidated appeals over a 2022 Tennessee fireworks show, the U.S.
New York's first appellate AI-sanction: a lawyer who conceded using AI, 23 fabricated cases, and $10,000 in penalties (Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v LeTennier)
In Deutsche Bank Natl.
Couvrette v. Wisnovsky (D. Or.): $15,500 Sanction for AI-Fabricated Citations, at $500 per Fake Case and $1,000 per Fabricated Quotation
A federal magistrate judge in Oregon sanctioned plaintiffs' counsel Stephen Brigandi $15,500 for filing three summary-judgment briefs that cited fifteen non-existent cases and eight fabricated quotations, adopting a $500-per-case / $1,000-per-quotation formula, then struck the briefs, dismissed the case with prejudice, and referred counsel to the Oregon State Bar.
Dastou v. Holmes: a Massachusetts judge sanctions a lawyer for ChatGPT-fabricated jury instructions — no fine, but an MCLE course and no billing the client
In Dastou v.
A federal judge struck a lawyer's brief over 17 AI-fabricated quotations and folded the conduct into a grievance referral
In the consolidated Fat Joe litigation (Dixon v.
Oregon Court of Appeals fines a lawyer $10,000 for AI-fabricated authority — the state's largest such penalty, and the Ringo formula's biggest bill yet
In Doiban v.
Fivehouse v. U.S. Dept. of Defense (E.D.N.C.): A Federal Prosecutor Is Publicly Reprimanded for a Brief With AI-Fabricated Quotations — and the Court Skips a Fine Because the DoJ Already Fired Him
A federal magistrate judge in North Carolina publicly reprimanded former Assistant U.S.
Gauthier v. Goodyear: a Texas lawyer is sanctioned $2,000 for filing AI-hallucinated case citations
In a wrongful-termination suit, plaintiff's counsel used a generative-AI tool to draft a brief and did not verify it.
A federal court fined a lawyer $6,000 for a brief built on an AI-hallucinated case
In Gardner v.
In re Marla C. Martin (Bankr. N.D. Ill.): $5,500 Rule 9011 Sanction for a ChatGPT-Fabricated Brief
A federal bankruptcy judge in Chicago found that debtor's counsel Thomas E.
A federal judge fined a lawyer $5,000 for filing AI-fabricated case citations against T.D. Jakes
In Jakes v.
Johnson v. Dunn: three lawyers are disqualified and referred to the bar for filing five ChatGPT-hallucinated citations
Three Butler Snow attorneys defending an Alabama prison official filed two motions with case citations invented by ChatGPT — five made-up citations in all.
An Ohio federal judge fines two lawyers $7,500 for AI-fabricated citations — 'the most egregious' Rule 11 violation in his 46 years on the bench
In Kettering Adventist Healthcare v.
Kohls v. Ellison: a court throws out a Stanford misinformation expert's declaration after GPT-4o invented its citations
To defend Minnesota's political-deepfake law, the state's Attorney General filed an expert declaration from a Stanford AI-misinformation scholar.
Kruse v. Karlen — Missouri appeals court fines a pro se litigant $10,000 after 22 of 24 cited cases turn out to be AI fabrications (Mo. App. E.D., Feb. 2024)
A non-lawyer's AI-drafted appellate brief cited 24 cases; only two were real.
Nine of 27 citations were wrong and two of the cases did not exist — a court-appointed Special Master ordered Ellis George and K&L Gates to pay $31,100
In Lacey v.
A Kansas federal judge fined five attorneys $12,000 for AI-fabricated citations — and named the failure, not the AI
In Lexos Media IP, LLC v.
The Ninth Circuit fines two lawyers $2,500 each and suspends them for six months over AI-hallucinated briefs — but the sanction is for candor, not for using AI
In Lnu v.
A federal court fined a lawyer $6,000 for three briefs full of AI-fabricated citations
In Mid Central Operating Engineers v.
Oregon Court of Appeals fines a lawyer $2,000 for AI-fabricated authority — and sets a per-item price: $500 a fake citation, $1,000 a fake quote
In Ringo v.
AI hallucinated eight of nine cases in a Morgan & Morgan brief — a federal judge fined the lawyers $5,000 and revoked one pro hac vice
In Wadsworth v.
Czech Constitutional Court fines a lawyer 25,000 CZK for a complaint built on AI-hallucinated case law
The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic imposed a 25,000 CZK procedural fine on Prague lawyer Mgr.
United States v. McGee: a federal judge fines a court-appointed defense lawyer $5,000 for AI-hallucinated citations produced by a Microsoft Word plug-in called Ghostwriter Legal (2025)
In United States v.
Noland v. Land of the Free: California's First Published Opinion on AI-Fabricated Citations ($10,000 Sanction)
In California's first published appellate opinion on AI-fabricated citations, the Court of Appeal (2d Dist., Div.
Garner v. Kadince: Utah Court of Appeals Sanctions Counsel for ChatGPT-Hallucinated Citations (2025 UT App 80)
In Utah's first published appellate opinion on AI-hallucinated citations, the Utah Court of Appeals sanctioned Petitioner's counsel under rule 40 for filing a petition drafted with ChatGPT that cited a non-existent case, 'Royer v.
Murray (Wamba Wemba) v Victoria: a Federal Court of Australia indemnity-costs order after AI-fabricated citations
In a native title case, Justice Bernard Murphy of the Federal Court of Australia ordered the applicant's solicitors, Massar Briggs Law, to personally pay the respondents' costs on an indemnity basis after two court documents contained false and incorrect citations that the court found seemed likely to have arisen through Generative AI — a junior solicitor had used the Google Scholar search tool and failed to verify the results.
No files match. Loosen a filter or clear the search.
Have proof worth filing?
If you delivered a real automation or AI-ops outcome, bring it to the dojo and earn a place in the record.