Skip to main content
Citation Safe

Sanctions — Week of 2025-10-13

26 AI-hallucination sanctions decided between 2025-10-13 and 2025-10-19 (ISO week 2025-W42). 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
26
With monetary penalty
6 of 26
Courts
24
ISO week
2025-W42

Outcomes this week

  • Warning8
  • Brief Struck; Cert Requirement; Monetary Sanction; Bar Referral1
  • Certification Requirement For Future Ai-assisted Filings.1
  • Costs Of 1,500 Eur, Referral To The Bar1
  • Costs Order1
  • Court Declined To Award Costs To Applicant; Portions Of The Reply Brief Were Struck; Admonishment1
  • Exclusion From Procurement1
  • Filings Stricken; Show Cause Order1
  • Judgment Annuled, New Trial Before Different Judge Ordered1
  • Misconduct Taken Into Account For Adverse Costs Order1
  • Monetary Sanction1
  • No Reliance On Authorities Submitted; Monetary Sanction1
  • No Reliance On Hallucinated Material1
  • Order Include Signed Certification1
  • Referral1
  • Show Cause Order1
  • Wasted Costs Order; Bar Referral1

AI tool implicated

  • Implied16
  • Unidentified7
  • ChatGPT2
  • LEAP legal software1

This week’s read-across

26 rulings landed on the docket between 2025-10-13 and 2025-10-19. The most common recorded outcome this week was Warning (8 of 26). Of the 26 rulings, 6 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 2025-10-13

T.B. v K.M.

King's Bench for Saskatchewan · Decided 2025-10-15 · Court declined to award costs to applicant; portions of the reply brief were struck; admonishment · AI tool: Implied.

Read the full teardown →

Courts represented this week

Nearby weeks

← Prev: 2025-W41 (20)Next: 2025-W43 (24) →

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.