Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 10, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 8, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesRobenson Lafontant v. Coolidge-CLK St. Germaine
Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 90/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.
Corpus matter record

Robenson Lafontant v. Coolidge-CLK St. Germaine

E.D. Louisiana · Oct 2, 2025

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The court sanctioned counsel $1,000, ordered one hour of CLE on generative AI, and referred counsel to the Disciplinary Committee for filing a brief containing fabricated and misrepresented case law, in violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(2).

Why the court cared
The court reasoned that Rule 11 requires attorneys to read and confirm the existence and validity of legal authorities. Counsel's failure to verify citations, including the use of a fabricated AI-generated case, violated the objective standard of reasonableness required by Rule 11(b)(2).
Why it matters now
Admitting 'I didn't verify' costs $1K plus CLE plus a bar referral; verification is the minimum bar, not best practice.

Why this matter is tracked

Counsel for the plaintiff, Pius A. Obioha, filed a memorandum in opposition to a motion for summary judgment containing fabricated and misrepresented case law. The court identified that counsel cited a non-existent case, 'Miller v. Housing Authority of New Orleans,' and misrepresented the holding of 'Boudreaux v. Boudreaux.' Counsel admitted he delegated the drafting and review of the memorandum to associates and failed to verify the accuracy of the citations before signing and filing the document. Finding a violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(2), the court imposed a $1,000 monetary sanction payable personally by counsel, ordered one hour of CLE on generative AI, and referred counsel to the Disciplinary Committee.

Operational lesson

Admitting 'I didn't verify' costs $1K plus CLE plus a bar referral; verification is the minimum bar, not best practice.

Record details

LouisianaSingle-state evidence scope
Explore LAOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtE.D. Louisiana
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit5th Circuit
DateOct 2, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeThe court imposed a $1,000 monetary sanction, mandated one hour of CLE on generative AI, and referred counsel to the Disciplinary Committee.
Known amount$1,000
Professional sanctionReferral to the Disciplinary Committee of the Eastern District of Louisiana and mandatory 1 hour of CLE on generative AI.
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

implied

The court identified the use of a fabricated, AI-generated case.

Procedural posture

The court issued a show cause order under Rule 11(c)(3) and held a hearing on October 2, 2025, to address the filing of inaccurate citations.

Correction behavior

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.

  1. Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited Boudreaux v. Boudreaux to support tenant-rights and non-waiver-by-continued-occupancy propositions, but the cited case concerns whether a principal was a statutory employer; the opinion's holding was misrepresented.
  2. Fabricated: Case Law | Cited 'Miller v. Housing Authority of New Orleans' for constructive eviction and rent-withholding; court could not locate the case and reporter/volume pointed to unrelated Rosen decision; court concluded the citation was fabricated/AI-generated.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Robenson Lafontant v. Coolidge-CLK St. Germaine?
The court sanctioned counsel $1,000, ordered one hour of CLE on generative AI, and referred counsel to the Disciplinary Committee for filing a brief containing fabricated and misrepresented case law, in violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(2).
Why does Robenson Lafontant v. Coolidge-CLK St. Germaine matter for legal AI risk?
Admitting 'I didn't verify' costs $1K plus CLE plus a bar referral; verification is the minimum bar, not best practice.
What does the public record establish about Robenson Lafontant v. Coolidge-CLK St. Germaine?
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 Robenson Lafontant v. Coolidge-CLK St. Germaine 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.