Court questions law firm after petition with AI-generated, nonexistent case citations; sanctions discussed

A three-judge panel of the Utah Court of Appeals on Tuesday held an order-to-show-cause hearing after a petition for interlocutory relief contained case citations later identified as fabricated by an artificial-intelligence tool. The panel—Judge Michelle Christensen Forster, Judge Gregory Orme and Judge Amy Oliver—questioned counsel about how the error occurred and whether sanctions are warranted.

Why it matters: The hearing probed the duty of candor attorneys owe to tribunals and the growing risk posed when lawyers rely on generative-AI tools without verification. Fabricated case law in filings threatens the integrity of judicial records and imposes time and expense on opposing counsel and courts that must identify and respond to the false authorities.

At the hearing, counsel representing the attorneys who filed the petition said the filing was “a serious mistake” and that a law clerk used ChatGPT to help draft the initial petition. “This filing was a serious mistake. My clients apologize to the court, to opposing counsel and their…