Silva Cordeiro v. Municipio de Santana do Parnaiba
São Paulo State Tribunal · Jul 25, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- São Paulo State Tribunal
- Record ID
- silva-cordeiro-v-municipio-de-santana-do-parnaiba-2025-07-25
- Observed outcome
- Appeal dismissed; appellant fined one minimum wage for bad faith litigation; OAB notified for disciplinary investigation.
- Known monetary consequence
- Recorded in local statutory unit
Why this matter warrants attention
The court sanctioned the lawyer for bad faith litigation by imposing a fine of one minimum wage and ordering a referral to the OAB for professional disciplinary review, following the submission of fabricated legal citations generated via AI.
The court reasoned that the submission of non-existent precedents constitutes bad faith litigation under Art. 80, V of the CPC, as it misleads the judiciary and hinders the efficient administration of justice. The court cited the STF's Reclamação 78.890 as precedent for treating AI-generated false citations as grounds for both procedural sanctions and disciplinary referrals to the OAB.
Brazilian courts now auto-notify OAB for fabricated quotes; assume any false citation triggers a disciplinary referral.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated Quotes
- Administrative
- Trial
- Monetary
- Professional
- AI attribution
- Explicitly Recorded
- Recorded tool
- AI (unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Recorded in local statutory unit
- Procedural posture
- Interlocutory appeal (Agravo de Instrumento) dismissed by the 6th Public Law Chamber of the São Paulo State Tribunal.
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 in the creation of the petition.
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 case law citations generated by AI tools before filing.
- Maintain a documented audit trail of legal research to demonstrate due diligence in the event of a citation challenge.
- Review all AI-generated output for accuracy against primary source documents, specifically verifying the existence of quoted passages.
- Establish internal review procedures for filings to ensure compliance with professional conduct standards regarding the accuracy of legal research.