Tekway, Inc. v. AT&T Services, Inc.
N.D. Illinois · Jul 14, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- N.D. Illinois
- Record ID
- tekway-inc-v-at-t-services-inc-2026-07-14
- Observed outcome
- Summary judgment granted for defendant; motion for sanctions denied.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
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.
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.
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.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Tort
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Unspecified
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Memorandum Opinion and Order granting Defendant's motion for summary judgment and denying Defendant's motion for attorneys' fees and costs.
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
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
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.