Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Jul 27, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 24, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Source-linked corpus view
Fake Citations
Fake Citations appears in 1,542 of 1,809 public corpus records (85.2%). This page describes the recorded dataset, not an incidence rate, prevalence of AI use, or a prediction of future outcomes.
Where does Fake Citations appear and what responses are recorded?
Taxonomy definition: Authorities or citations recorded as nonexistent, inaccurate, or not locatable in the cited form.
AI Vortex currently links 1,542 source-linked public matters classified with Fake Citations. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (1,542), Misrepresented authority (652) and Fabricated or altered quotations (484). Recorded responses and outcomes include Warning or admonishment (509), No adjudicated consequence recorded (489) and Monetary sanction (335). Categories can overlap within the same matter, and these counts describe this public corpus rather than the overall behavior or sanction rate of the failure.
Every count below links to the exact matching records. The linked source, subsequent docket history, and local procedural context remain controlling.
Observed issue mix
What problems appear in these records?
Fabricated authorities1,542 · 100%Misrepresented authority652 · 42.3%Fabricated or altered quotations484 · 31.4%
Issue categories can overlap within a single matter.
Recorded consequences
How did courts or authorities respond?
Warning or admonishment509 · 33%No adjudicated consequence recorded489 · 31.7%Monetary sanction335 · 21.7%Bar or professional referral135 · 8.8%Professional discipline118 · 7.7%Dismissal or adverse disposition90 · 5.8%
Response categories can overlap and do not imply that every matter ended in a sanction.
Participant context
Who appears in these matters?
Matter context
Which practice areas are represented?
Attribution status
How is AI involvement recorded?
AI implied or unspecified1,046 · 67.8%Tool not identified325 · 21.1%Named AI tool recorded161 · 10.4%Allegation-only record10 · 0.6%
Unspecified attribution is not evidence that a particular vendor was used.
Corpus evolution
When were these matters recorded?
Public records in this view
Showing the most recent 24 of 1,542 matching records.
Joann LeDoux v. Outliers, Inc.W.D. Washington · WA · ChatGPT, Claude
Jul 24, 2026Kimberly A. Graves v. Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyE.D. California · CA · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 24, 2026Morgan Cole v. Hobby Town Unlimited, Inc.C.D. Illinois · IL · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 24, 2026Catarina Almeida Porfirio v. Homeland Security, et al.D. D.C. · DC · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 23, 2026Hagan v. Black Diamond Experts, LLCD. Utah · UT · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 23, 2026Mary C. Graves v. Brian K. GravesCA Illinois (3d) · IL · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 23, 2026Gideon J. Sipin v. The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., et al.N.D. Alabama · AL · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 22, 2026Pamon v. United States Postal Service et alN.D. Texas · TX · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 22, 2026Rose Lannquist Gouldy v. Timothy M. Chiasson, et al.CA Florida (4d) · FL · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 22, 2026Merritt v. MooreCA Tennessee · TN · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 21, 2026以非药品冒充药品案DC Yichang City (Hubei) · China · Unidentified
Jul 21, 2026Khan v. Howard County BAPCA Maryland · MD · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 20, 2026Abybatou Mbow v. Officer Michael Mackert et al. (2)D. Maryland · MD · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 17, 2026Haddadi et al. v. Soleimani et al., 2026 ONSC 3920DC Ontario · Canada · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 17, 2026Ammann v. Markel Insurance CompanyN.D. Ohio · OH · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 16, 2026Cames et al. v. Lowe's Home CentersM.D. Florida · FL · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 16, 2026Giggs v. Michel (dba Soma MD Advanced Medical Aesthetics)CRT · Canada · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 16, 2026Izzeddin Ahmed Abdulghaffar Daghra v. Steve Hinkley, et al.W.D. Michigan · MI · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 16, 2026בדש נ' אוחנהMagistrate's Court, Tel Aviv-Jaffa · Israel · Unidentified
Jul 16, 2026Arrieta v. CervantesCA Arizona · AZ · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 15, 2026Christine Thomas v. United States Department of Justice, et al.E.D. North Carolina · NC · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 15, 2026Dineen/Shibata v. KotchkaCA Arizona (1d) · AZ · Unidentified
Jul 15, 2026Minhye Park v. Hon. Barrington D. Parker, et al.S.D. New York · NY · GPT-3.5
Jul 15, 2026Mullins v. Duquesne University of the Holy SpiritW.D. Pennsylvania · PA · Claude
Jul 15, 2026Scope and limitation
This page groups existing structured public-record fields. For judges, the counts describe matters in which that person is recorded as a decision-maker; they do not establish a judge’s general practices or sanction rate. For every entity type, the view is not a comparison against unobserved proceedings.
Indexing status
This entity meets the public indexing baseline of at least 3 source-linked records.