AI Sanctions Tracker
A live record of attorneys sanctioned for AI-hallucinated citations. Curated from public court filings and press coverage. We publish this so the bar can see the trend, the press can cite the count, and Sentinel customers can show their carrier the risk they have eliminated.
Source coverage: federal and state court filings; live counts via researcher Damien Charlotin (HEC Paris) and reporting in NPR, Reuters, Law360. If you spot a missing case, email tracker@aiesquire.io.
| Case | Court | Year | Sanction |
|---|---|---|---|
Mata v. Avianca, Inc. First high-profile US case: attorneys submitted a brief with six fake cases generated by ChatGPT. Sanctioned under Rule 11. | S.D.N.Y. (Castel, J.) | 2023 | $5,000 sanction; widely cited |
Park v. Kim Counsel cited a non-existent decision in a Second Circuit brief; counsel admitted using ChatGPT without verification. | 2d Cir. | 2024 | Referral to attorney grievance committee |
Multiple matters tracked by Charlotin (HEC Paris) Live tracker maintained by researcher Damien Charlotin; cases span US federal and state courts plus international jurisdictions. | Various | 2024–2026 | 1,200+ documented globally |
Most of these attorneys did not lie. They trusted their AI tool. Sentinel is the layer between your firm and that trust.
Every cite checked against real case law. Hallucinated cases flagged in red. Misquoted cases in yellow. Bluebook-clean. Certificate ready to file.
Solo Sentinel is $147 per month. Your malpractice premium is roughly $4,500 per year. Even a 5% discount pays Sentinel for eighteen months.