AI Hallucinations – Cal Attorneys Fees

Sanctions: First District Court Of Appeal Publishes Opinion Informing In Pro Per Litigants That They Cannot Use And Are Subject For Sanctions When Relying On AI Hallucinations

March 20, 2026

This Case Builds On Cases Applicable To Attorneys, But Extends The Prohibition To In Pro Per Litigants. In Sheerer v. Panas, Case No. A171804 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Mar. 19, 2026) (partially published; AI discussion published), the appellate court made clear that the recent California case authority which prohibits AI hallucinations equally applies to in […]

Appeal Sanctions: $5,000 Was The Appellate Sanctions For AI Hallucination Transgressions

Cases: Appeal Sanctions

March 5, 2026

Another Published Opinion In This Area—Be A Human, Read, Check, And Verify AI Research. In re the Domestic Partnership of Campos & Munoz, Case No. D085584 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 5, 2026) (published) is post-worthy because it builds on prior cases and imposed $5,000 in appeal sanctions, payable to the appellate clerk, for filing

Appeal Sanctions: 4/1 DCA Levies Sanctions For A Frivolous Appeal Of Three Orders, Based Partially On A1 Hallucinations Being Referenced

Cases: Appeal Sanctions

December 18, 2025

$59,236 Payable To Respondent; $15,000 Payable To Appellate Clerk In Howell Management Services, LLC v. Rota, Case No. D086055 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 15, 2025) (unpublished), the 4/1 DCA recently found appellant filed a frivolous appeal involving three orders, with AI hallucinations also found in the appellant’s appellate briefing (an unreasonable CRC violation). The