Law360 has Ore. Atty Sanctioned $10K For Brief With Fabricated Citations
An Oregon appellate court has ordered an attorney to pay $10,000 for filing an opening brief containing fabricated case citations, quotations that "do not exist anywhere in Oregon case law" and other inaccuracies, according to an opinion. -- The case is Henry Doiban et al. v. Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission, case number A181982, in the Court of Appeals of the State of Oregon.
And here in California, don't miss Sheerer v. Panas published by 1/4:
As an in propria persona litigant, Panas submitted a respondent’s brief that attributes quotes to published cases in which no such quote appears and to cases that do not exist, and Panas’s nonmanufactured authorities do not discuss the topics for which they are cited. His brief also does not conform to the California Rules of Court (hereinafter Rules) regarding its contents, formatting, and directive to provide support for factual assertions with citations to the record. (See Rule 8.204.) In a declaration submitted to this court, Panas explained the fabrications were due to his use of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool to write the brief. ....
We partially publish this opinion to extend that warning to in propria persona litigants.
Law360 has Where Calif. State Courts Landed On Generative AI Use Rules. This article has a nifty interactive map showing what each county has done.
Posts
