Courts are increasingly scrutinizing whether counsel caught the fake citations in the other side's brief - and some have declined relief to lawyers who missed them. CiteLedger verifies every citation in an opposing filing, flags the ones that do not exist or resolve to the wrong case, checks quoted language against the opinions, and keeps the timestamped record that documents your diligence - and your recoverable time.
court decisions involving AI-hallucinated material tracked in the leading academic database, and climbing weekly.
AI Hallucination Cases Databasesanction in the California appellate case that also denied fees to the lawyer who failed to detect the opponent's fakes.
LawSites, Sept. 2025of verification work per incoming motion when done by hand - time that is recoverable as fees when documented.
CiteLedger does the first pass in secondsBuilt for the moment a suspicious brief lands in your inbox. Your document is processed in memory and never stored - see how it works under the hood.
PDF, DOCX, or pasted text. CiteLedger extracts every case citation with the same open-source engine the courts' own data project built. Your document is processed in memory for the check and is not retained.
Does the citation exist in a database of 18+ million? Does it resolve to the case the brief says it is - or a different one (the classic AI fabrication)? And is the language the brief quotes actually in the opinion? Verdicts: FOUND, NOT FOUND, WRONG CASE, or REVIEW.
Every check is entered in a timestamped verification ledger. Export it as a court-exhibit-formatted record, a CSV, or a ready-to-send meet-and-confer paragraph.
Anyone can scan a brief. The ledger is the record of what you checked and when: timestamped, server-attested, and exportable. Paired with your own verification of each flag, it documents your diligence and the time you spent - the kind of record fee applications under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and sanctions motions are built on.
| # | Citation | Case name | Verdict | Checked |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 550 U.S. 544 | Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly | FOUND | 14:02:11 |
| 2 | 812 F.4th 1093 | Smith v. Jonesburg County | NOT FOUND | 14:02:11 |
| 3 | 604 U.S. 912 | Turner v. Halbrook Industries | NOT FOUND | 14:02:12 |
| 4 | 384 U.S. 436 | Miranda v. Arizona | FOUND | 14:02:12 |
No national bright-line duty exists yet - but courts have begun weighing whether opposing counsel caught the fakes, and at least one has declined relief to lawyers who missed them. Read the primary sources below and judge the trajectory yourself.
"While the court did impose a $10,000 sanction on the attorney who filed two appellate briefs containing fake citations, it also declined to award attorneys' fees or costs to the opposing counsel, because of counsel's failure to report the fake citations to the court or even to detect them."
LawSites, "A New Wrinkle in AI Hallucination Cases," September 2025"More courts are coming down on 'non-offending counsel' for AI missteps" - with decisions using increasingly "stronger language" when admonishing lawyers who fail to catch an opponent's fabricated authorities.
ABA Journal, June 10, 20261,751 decisions involving AI-hallucinated material and counting - a database courts themselves now cite.
Damien Charlotin, AI Hallucination Cases DatabaseThe cheapest incumbent AI legal assistant runs $225 per user per month. CiteLedger does the defense-side job for a fraction of one billable hour.
Currently a free public beta: 5 checks per day per connection while we finish billing - nothing is charged and nothing can be purchased today. Tiers show planned launch pricing; items marked (planned) are not built yet and will exist before the tier is sold.
