in re: Nasser
E.D. Michigan (Bankruptcy) · Aug 15, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- E.D. Michigan (Bankruptcy)
- Record ID
- in-re-nasser-2025-08-15
- Observed outcome
- The Court issued a formal warning to counsel regarding the accuracy of filings and the use of generative AI, while also ruling on the underlying Motion to Dismiss.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Court issued a formal warning to Plaintiffs' counsel after identifying fabricated statutory quotations and non-existent record citations in a legal filing. The Court explicitly attributed these errors to the likely use of generative artificial intelligence and cautioned that such conduct is unacceptable in future submissions.
The Court reasoned that the submission of paraphrased language as block-quoted statutes and the inclusion of non-existent quotes from the Complaint undermined the veracity of the filing and necessitated a formal warning to counsel.
Block-quoted statutes must be copy-pasted from primary sources, never paraphrased or AI-summarized as verbatim text.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Bankruptcy
- Trial
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- Generative artificial intelligence (unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The court issued this warning in an Opinion granting in part and denying in part a Defendant's Motion to Dismiss an Adversary Complaint.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court expressed concern regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Compare every quoted passage and pincite directly with the underlying opinion or filing.
- Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
- Apply the same source-checking controls to AI (implied, unspecified) output as to any other research input.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.