Michael Wayne Singletary v. SWBC Mortgage Corporation et al.
CA Fifth Circuit · Mar 17, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- CA Fifth Circuit
- Record ID
- michael-wayne-singletary-v-swbc-mortgage-corporation-et-al-2026-03-17
- Observed outcome
- The district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's claims was affirmed.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff's claims, explicitly noting that the appellant relied on AI-hallucinated, non-existent case law. While the court did not impose a formal monetary sanction, it issued a formal warning that future failures to verify cited authority could lead to sanctions under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.
The court reasoned that the appellant's legal theories lacked support in actual case law and were instead predicated on non-existent, AI-generated citations. The court further determined that the appellant's additional arguments were not properly preserved in the district court proceedings.
This case illustrates judicial scrutiny of AI-generated citations in pro se filings. It serves as a reminder that courts are actively monitoring for hallucinated authorities and are prepared to issue warnings or potential sanctions for failure to verify research.
Failure modes and consequences
- Hallucinated_case_law
- Failure_to_verify_citations
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Contract
- Appellate
- AI attribution
- Explicitly Recorded
- Recorded tool
- AI (unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a district court's dismissal of claims with prejudice.
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 explicitly identified the use of AI-hallucinated case law.
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
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- 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.