Tabitha Alberti v. District of Columbia
D. DC · Feb 10, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- D. DC
- Record ID
- tabitha-alberti-v-district-of-columbia-2026-02-10
- Observed outcome
- The court permitted the filing of an amended opposition and is currently considering a separate motion for attorney fees filed by the defendant.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court found that the plaintiff's opposition brief was riddled with fabricated case law and inaccurate quotations. Counsel admitted at a hearing that these errors resulted from the use of artificial intelligence without subsequent verification of the brief's contents before filing.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff's Opposition contained citations to cases that do not exist and invented/incorrect quotations; court found brief "riddled" with fabricated citations and inaccurate references.
A brief riddled with fake cites means no one proofread it; require partner sign-off before filing any AI-assisted draft.
Failure modes and consequences
- Hallucinated_case_law
- Hallucinated_quotations
- Lack_of_human_verification
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Employment
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The court addressed the plaintiff's opposition to the defendant's motion to dismiss. Following the discovery of fabricated citations, the court held a hearing on October 16, 2025, and subsequently permitted the plaintiff to file an amended opposition. A motion for attorney fees regarding this conduct remains pending.
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
Counsel admitted to using AI but did not specify the tool.
Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Assign a responsible reviewer for AI-assisted research and drafting.
- Retain a matter-level record of source checks and corrections.