AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 11, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 9, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesBeus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 90/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Beus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al.

D. Utah · Sep 9, 2026

UT / federalEditorial impact: mediumfake citationsmisrepresented authorityothertrialMonetary
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel attributed language concerning an egregious-misconduct standard for vacatur to Denver & Rio Grande, but the court found that the case contains none of the terms “egregious” or “misconduct” and does not address that standard. Outcome: Two AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions. Order to Show Cause is here.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies fake citations and misrepresented authority and records Two AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Two AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions in D. Utah. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel attributed language concerning an egregious-misconduct standard for vacatur to Denver & Rio Grande, but the court found that the case contains none of the terms “egregious” or “misconduct” and does not address that standard. Outcome: Two AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions. Order to Show Cause is here.

Operational lesson

This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Two AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions in D. Utah. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

UtahSingle-state evidence scope
Explore UTOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtD. Utah
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit10th Circuit
DateSep 9, 2026
CL
AI toolClearBrief, Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeTwo AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions
Known amount$3,000
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

ClearBrief, Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Two AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

4 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

  1. Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel attributed language concerning an egregious-misconduct standard for vacatur to Denver & Rio Grande, but the court found that the case contains none of the terms “egregious” or “misconduct” and does not address that standard.
  2. Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel cited Oxford Health Plans for a proposition concerning evident partiality under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(2), but the court found that the case addressed the separate ground of whether an arbitrator exceeded its powers under § 10(a)(4).
  3. Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel attributed a material-effect or actual-influence requirement for alleged arbitrator bias to Denver & Rio Grande, but the court found that the case does not discuss evident partiality or contain the cited terms or their derivatives.
  4. Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited Scandinavian Reins. Co. v. Employers Reins. Corp., 472 F. App’x 806, but the court found that no such case existed under that name; the citation belonged to Dezhong Tian v. Holder, an immigration appeal.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Beus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al.?
Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel attributed language concerning an egregious-misconduct standard for vacatur to Denver & Rio Grande, but the court found that the case contains none of the terms “egregious” or “misconduct” and does not address that standard. Outcome: Two AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions. Order to Show Cause is here.
Why does Beus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al. matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Two AI-ethics CLE courses; Monetary Sanctions in D. Utah. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Beus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al.?
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 Beus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al. 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.

Hack v. Preston et alD. Utah · Aug 7, 2026same court · misrepresented authority + otherCarey v. Breakell et al.D. Utah · Jul 30, 2026same court · fake citations + misrepresented authorityRegan Wilkes, et al. v. Canyons School District, et al.D. Utah · May 4, 2026same court · fake citations + misrepresented authorityHagan v. Black Diamond Experts, LLCD. Utah · Jul 23, 2026same court · fake citations + trialPrimerica Life Insurance Company v. Daniel Vett Finlayson; Michelle JohnsonD. Utah · Apr 22, 2026same court · fake citations + trialNicholas and Barbara Moulder v. Davis School District (on behalf of M.M.)D. Utah · Mar 23, 2026same court · fake citations + trial