Landberg v City of New York
App. NY (2d) · May 20, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- App. NY (2d)
- Record ID
- landberg-v-city-of-new-york-2026-05-20
- Observed outcome
- The court issued an order to show cause regarding potential sanctions and costs against appellant's counsel.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued an order to show cause requiring counsel to explain why sanctions or costs should not be imposed for filing briefs containing fabricated or erroneous legal authority. This procedural step initiates a formal inquiry into potential misconduct regarding the accuracy of legal research presented to the court.
The linked record identifies tort and trial and records Order to Show Cause. This page does not infer judicial reasoning beyond the source.
This case highlights the judiciary's active monitoring of filings for fabricated legal authority. It serves as a reminder that counsel bears ultimate responsibility for the accuracy of research, regardless of the tools used to generate it.
Failure modes and consequences
- Tort
- Trial
- Ordered To Show Cause
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Order to Show Cause issued by the Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department, on May 20, 2026.
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 source document does not explicitly name an AI tool; attribution is implied by the nature of the errors.
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
- Implement mandatory verification protocols for all legal citations and authorities generated by AI tools.
- Conduct secondary manual review of all briefs to ensure cited authorities exist and are accurately represented.
- Establish internal oversight procedures for legal research workflows to mitigate the risk of submitting erroneous citations.