Postma v. York
D. Iowa · Decided 2025-01-02 · Brief Struck; Warning · AI tool: Unidentified.
2 AI-hallucination sanctions decided between 2024-12-30 and 2025-01-05 (ISO week 2025-W01). Every ruling below is sourced from the public docket — case name, decided date, outcome, AI tool implicated (when named), and any monetary penalty language pulled verbatim from the ruling.
2 rulings landed on the docket between 2024-12-30 and 2025-01-05. The most common recorded outcome this week was Brief Struck; Warning (1 of 2). No rulings this week specified a dollar-figure monetary penalty in the docket text — but bar referrals, adverse-costs orders, and case-standing consequences apply regardless.
Implied was the most-implicated AI tool this week (courts rarely require the attorney to name the tool by product name on the record; “Implied” means the ruling described an AI-generated brief without a product name).
The pattern each week is remarkably stable: existence failures (Layer 1) dominate. Attorneys file briefs containing citations that do not exist in any primary source — usually because a general-purpose LLM fabricated the citation and no deterministic pre-filing check caught it. Every ruling below is a preventable filing. See /verify for the pre-filing tool.
D. Iowa · Decided 2025-01-02 · Brief Struck; Warning · AI tool: Unidentified.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore · Decided 2024-12-30 · Judgment was retracted and case re-heard · AI tool: Implied.
Get the Sanctions Alert — a new issue every time a ruling lands.
Free double-opt-in newsletter. Case, sanction, fake cites, lesson. No promotional content.
Informational only. Not legal advice. Data derived from public court records; corrections at /contact.