Sanctions — Week of 2025-08-18

15 AI-hallucination sanctions decided between 2025-08-18 and 2025-08-24 (ISO week 2025-W34). 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: 15
With monetary penalty: 1 of 15
Courts: 15
ISO week: 2025-W34

Outcomes this week

Warning2
Admonishment1
Admonishment And Warning1
Arguments Disregarded1
Case Dismissed With Prejudice For One Year1
Court Denied Defendant's Motion For Leave To File A Surreply, Admonished Counsel For Submitting Non-existent Quotations, And Granted Plaintiff's Motion To Remand.1
N/a1
No Additional Sanctions (given Sanctions For Counsel In Other Cases)1
Plaintiff's Motion Denied As Frivolous; Reply And Sur-reply Struck; Plaintiff Ordered To Show Cause1
Referral Of The Issue To The Bar1
Submission Stricken1
Trial Court Imposed A Monetary Sanction Of $1,000 On The Lawyers For Causing Unjustified Delay; Referred The Lawyers To The Puerto Rico Supreme Court For Disciplinary Evaluation; Judge Inhibited From Cases Involving Those Lawyers And Case To Be Reassigned.1

AI tool implicated

Implied10
Unidentified4
Gen AI1

This week’s read-across

15 rulings landed on the docket between 2025-08-18 and 2025-08-24. The most common recorded outcome this week was Warning (2 of 15). Of the 15 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 2025-08-18

Chenco v. Do-Fluoride

D. Idaho · Decided 2025-08-22 · Court denied defendant's motion for leave to file a surreply, admonished counsel for submitting non-existent quotations, and granted plaintiff's motion to remand. · AI tool: Implied.