Compiled by Citation Safe (Digital Empire Holdings LLC) from the court’s published sanction order (decided July 13, 2026). Quotes and case details come from the order itself — check the primary source before relying on them.

Sanction teardown · ASBCA, USA · 2026-07-13

Appeal of PDO Ahuska Joint Venture LLC

What happened

In ASBCA, USA, a filing relied on an unnamed/unconfirmed AI tool to help draft legal argument. The court identified the following problems with the citations in that filing:

Fabricated (Case Law)

Appellant cited Lockheed Martin Corp., ASBCA No. 57525, 13-1 BCA ¶ 35,241 to support that contract interpretation is a question of law for summary judgment; Board found the citation fictitious/miscited and that 13-1 BCA ¶ 35,241 actually addresses Raytheon Missile Systems (a jurisdiction motion), and Lockheed Martin appears at 12-1 BCA ¶ 35,017 which does not support the asserted proposition.
Fabricated (Case Law)

Appellant cited Metric Constructors, Inc., ASBCA No. 50843, 99-1 BCA ¶ 30,134 to support that warranties may not be expanded beyond express terms; Board found the citation fictitious and that 99-1 BCA ¶ 30,134 actually addresses Bean Horizon-Weeks Marine and does not concern warranties (Metric Constructors appears at 98-2 BCA ¶ 30,088 and does not support the assertion).
Fabricated (Case Law)

Appellant cited Blinderman Constr. Co., ASBCA No. 55770, 09-2 BCA ¶ 34,257 to support warranty principles; Board found the citation fictitious—09-2 BCA ¶ 34,257 corresponds to Vibration and Sound Solutions and does not address warranties, and ASBCA No. 55770 is the docket for AMES Corp., which settled without a decision.
Fabricated (Case Law)

Appellant cited J. A. Jones Constr. Co., ASBCA No. 38679, 90-3 BCA ¶ 23,241 to support that warranties may not be implied from performance specs; Board found the citation fictitious—90-3 BCA ¶ 23,241 actually addresses Goetz Demolition and not warranties, and ASBCA No. 38679 corresponds to Camel Manufacturing with no published decision.

Which AI tool

an unnamed/unconfirmed AI tool. Note: Charlotin's public database records tool attribution only where a court order, brief, or reporting on the matter states it explicitly; "unidentified" or "implied" means the record indicates AI use but does not name a specific product — we do not guess.

Outcome

Citations struck

How Citation Safe would have caught this

Citation Safe runs three deterministic layers before a brief is filed: (1) does the citation exist against CourtListener's database of published opinions, (2) if quoted, does that exact language appear in the source, (3) does the cited case actually support the proposition it is cited for. Fabricated case citations fail Layer 1. Fabricated or misattributed quotations fail Layer 2 even when the underlying case is real. Misrepresented holdings — a real case cited for a proposition it does not support — are the target of Layer 3. None of these checks involve asking another language model whether the citation looks right; they are lookups and text-matches against the actual source, which is why a hallucinated citation has to survive a direct lookup against the authoritative source — not another model's opinion — to earn a VERIFIED stamp; our measured false-verify rate is published live at /quality.

Check a brief before you file it → · See our live false-verify rate

Source: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2903/64164_PDO_Ahuska_Joint_Venture_LLC_7.13.26_NonDispDec.pdf, via Damien Charlotin's public AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC0).