Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group
CA Washington · Apr 20, 2026
What happened in this matter?
The court rebuked the pro se appellant for including fictitious case quotations and fabricated citations in his appellate briefing. The court explicitly identified these as 'hallucinated' by generative AI or other sources, warning that such conduct is detrimental to the legal process and violates the duty of candor required of all litigants.
- Why the court cared
- The court reasoned that the appellant's inclusion of fictitious quotations and invented citations violated the duty of candor and the requirements of RAP 10.3(a)(6), which mandates that arguments be supported by accurate legal authority.
- Why it matters now
- This case serves as a clear judicial warning that courts will not tolerate the submission of AI-hallucinated citations. It reinforces the universal obligation of all litigants, including pro se parties, to verify the accuracy of every authority cited in their filings.
Why this matter is tracked
In an appeal regarding the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA), the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's summary judgment dismissal of the appellant's claims. During the appellate proceedings, the pro se appellant included fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases in his briefing. The court explicitly rebuked this lack of candor, noting that the citations were invented or hallucinated by generative AI or other sources. The court emphasized that all litigants, including those appearing pro se, bear the responsibility to verify that their filings are accurate and free from fabricated citations. The court's decision focused on the statutory interpretation of 'public agency' under the OPMA, ultimately finding the respondent group did not meet the criteria.
This case serves as a clear judicial warning that courts will not tolerate the submission of AI-hallucinated citations. It reinforces the universal obligation of all litigants, including pro se parties, to verify the accuracy of every authority cited in their filings.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The court attributed the fabricated citations to generative AI or other sources.
Appeal of a trial court's order granting summary judgment dismissal in favor of respondents and denying the appellant's cross-motion for partial summary judgment.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant provided fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases; court found these quotations to be invented and rebuked the lack of candor.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant included invented or 'hallucinated' citations in his briefing; court noted these citations were fabricated or generated by AI or other sources.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group?
- The court rebuked the pro se appellant for including fictitious case quotations and fabricated citations in his appellate briefing. The court explicitly identified these as 'hallucinated' by generative AI or other sources, warning that such conduct is detrimental to the legal process and violates the duty of candor required of all litigants.
- Why does Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group matter for legal AI risk?
- This case serves as a clear judicial warning that courts will not tolerate the submission of AI-hallucinated citations. It reinforces the universal obligation of all litigants, including pro se parties, to verify the accuracy of every authority cited in their filings.
- What does the public record establish about Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group?
- The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
- Which source supports this Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group summary?
- The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.
Related matters
Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.