AI vs. Human Error

AI hallucination or simple human error? I've discussed with many how and where we draw that line.

We used to chalk up typos in citations and overstated parentheticals to human error. Now? Some of us jump to accusations of misusing AI.

In one recent case, a party took issue with ONE (a single) incorrect citation and asked that the Court to sanction the mistaken attorney with dismissal and attorneys fees.

The Court was not impressed with this:

"Movants do not show—or attempt to show—by clear and convincing evidence that plaintiffs attempted to commit a fraud on the court, as required to warrant the requested sanction of dismissal." Brown v. Real Estate Capital of America, LLC, Case No. 165361/2025, 2026 WL 2291696 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Aug. 7, 2026).

and

"Movants have identified a quotation in plaintiffs' opposition papers that does not appear in the case to which the opposition attributes it. But even if this court were to conclude that the challenged quotation is an AI fabrication, rather than the product of ordinary human error, movants' sanctions request is based on a single quotation erroneously attributed to a single case; and the passage of the opposition in which the quotation appears merely provides additional, supplemental support for an argument that rests on properly cited authority."

The lesson? We gotta find the middle ground.

Sanctions have their place, but it shouldn't be a knee-jerk tool or ask. An overstated sanctions request risks your credibility, too.

🔥♥️✌🏻