Wilt v. Department of the Navy
E.D. Texas · Decided 2025-05-02 · Warning · AI tool: Unidentified.
Sanctions — Week of 2025-04-28
7 AI-hallucination sanctions decided between 2025-04-28 and 2025-05-04 (ISO week 2025-W18). 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
- 7
- With monetary penalty
- 1 of 7
- Courts
- 7
- ISO week
- 2025-W18
Outcomes this week
- Warning2
- Court Referred The Matter To The Disciplinary Committee1
- Court Treated The Cited Authorities As Fehlzitate (not Verifiable) And Did Not Rely On Them1
- Petition Dismissed In Limine; Plaintiff’s Counsel Ordered To Pay ₪1,500 In Personal Costs To The State And ₪3,500 To The Opposing Party1
- Plaintiff Warned To Ensure Accuracy Of Future Submissions1
AI tool implicated
- Implied4
- Unidentified2
- ChatGPT1
This week’s read-across
7 rulings landed on the docket between 2025-04-28 and 2025-05-04. The most common recorded outcome this week was Warning (2 of 7). Of the 7 rulings, 1 carried an explicit monetary penalty in the ruling text.
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.
All rulings, week of 2025-04-28
Lozano González v. Roberge
Housing Administrative Tribunal · Decided 2025-05-01 · AI tool: ChatGPT.
Gustafson v. Amazon.com
D. Arizona · Decided 2025-04-30 · Warning · AI tool: Implied.
Nexgen Pathology Services Ltd v. Darcueil Duncan
High Court of Justice · Decided 2025-04-30 · Court referred the matter to the Disciplinary Committee · AI tool: Implied.
Moales v. Land Rover Cherry Hill
D. Connecticut · Decided 2025-04-30 · Plaintiff warned to ensure accuracy of future submissions · AI tool: Unidentified.
Beschluss 5 U 1/25
OLG Celle · Decided 2025-04-29 · Court treated the cited authorities as Fehlzitate (not verifiable) and did not rely on them · AI tool: Implied.
Anonymous v. Anonymous
Israel · Decided 2025-04-29 · Petition dismissed in limine; Plaintiff’s counsel ordered to pay ₪1,500 in personal costs to the state and ₪3,500 to the opposing party · Penalty: 5000 ILS · AI tool: Implied.
Courts represented this week
Nearby weeks
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.