Skip to main content
Citation Safe

Sanctions — Week of 2025-02-10

4 AI-hallucination sanctions decided between 2025-02-10 and 2025-02-16 (ISO week 2025-W07). 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.

Week at a glance

Total rulings
4
With monetary penalty
0 of 4
Courts
4
ISO week
2025-W07

Outcomes this week

  • Attorney Asked To Withdraw Guilty Plea1
  • Citations Ignored1
  • Relevant Submissions Ignored1
  • The Court Dismissed The Applicant's Interlocutory Application For Disqualification And Referral To A Full Court.1

AI tool implicated

  • "Internet searches"1
  • ChatGPT1
  • Copilot1
  • Not specified1

This week’s read-across

4 rulings landed on the docket between 2025-02-10 and 2025-02-16. The most common recorded outcome this week was Attorney Asked To Withdraw Guilty Plea (1 of 4). 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.

"Internet searches" was the most-implicated AI tool this week.

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.

All rulings, week of 2025-02-10

Courts represented this week

Nearby weeks

← Prev: 2025-W06 (1)Next: 2025-W08 (3) →

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.

Subscribe (free) →Verify your own brief
All weekly digestsFull sanctions databaseVerify your own brief →

Informational only. Not legal advice. Data derived from public court records; corrections at /contact.