Tekway, Inc. v. AT&T Services, Inc.
N.D. Illinois · Jul 14, 2026
What happened in this matter?
The court identified a fabricated case citation in the plaintiff's brief. While the court granted summary judgment to the defendant on the merits of the underlying tort claims, it did not impose sanctions, explicitly denying the defendant's motion for attorneys' fees and costs under Rule 11.
- Why the court cared
- The court observed that the cited case Webb v. Frawley, 392 F.3d 815, 819 (7th Cir. 2004) does not exist and that the actual case at 906 F.3d 569 (7th Cir. 2018) does not support the plaintiff's proposition.
- Why it matters now
- This case illustrates the judicial identification of a hallucinated citation within a summary judgment brief. It serves as a reminder that courts actively verify legal authorities and that reliance on unverified AI-generated research can undermine the credibility of substantive legal arguments.
Why this matter is tracked
In a tortious interference and civil conspiracy action, the plaintiff, Tekway, Inc., cited a non-existent case, Webb v. Frawley, 392 F.3d 815, 819 (7th Cir. 2004), to support its argument regarding reasonable expectations of continued employment. The court explicitly noted that this citation is incorrect and that the actual case, Webb v. Frawley, 906 F.3d 569 (7th Cir. 2018), does not support the proposition for which it was cited. The court granted summary judgment to the defendant, AT&T Services, Inc., on the merits, finding that the plaintiff failed to establish the first element of its tortious interference claim. The court denied the defendant's request for Rule 11 sanctions, declining to reach the issue of whether the filing was baseless.
This case illustrates the judicial identification of a hallucinated citation within a summary judgment brief. It serves as a reminder that courts actively verify legal authorities and that reliance on unverified AI-generated research can undermine the credibility of substantive legal arguments.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Memorandum Opinion and Order granting Defendant's motion for summary judgment and denying Defendant's motion for attorneys' fees and costs.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent case Webb v. Frawley, 392 F.3d 815, 819 (7th Cir. 2004); the court observed that this citation is incorrect and that the real Webb v. Frawley is 906 F.3d 569 (7th Cir. 2018), which does not support the cited proposition.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Tekway, Inc. v. AT&T Services, Inc.?
- The court identified a fabricated case citation in the plaintiff's brief. While the court granted summary judgment to the defendant on the merits of the underlying tort claims, it did not impose sanctions, explicitly denying the defendant's motion for attorneys' fees and costs under Rule 11.
- Why does Tekway, Inc. v. AT&T Services, Inc. matter for legal AI risk?
- This case illustrates the judicial identification of a hallucinated citation within a summary judgment brief. It serves as a reminder that courts actively verify legal authorities and that reliance on unverified AI-generated research can undermine the credibility of substantive legal arguments.
- What does the public record establish about Tekway, Inc. v. AT&T Services, Inc.?
- 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 Tekway, Inc. v. AT&T Services, Inc. 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.