A Utah-based lawyer has been sanctioned by the state’s Court of Appeals after he filed a legal brief containing citations to a nonexistent court case generated by artificial intelligence.
The court documents reported by ABC4 says the Court of Appeals found that Attorney Richard Bednar submitted a petition that included “fabricated legal authority” obtained from ChatGPT. The filing referenced a case titled Royer v Nelson—a citation that, upon review, did not exist in any known legal database.
In its ruling, the court emphasized the evolving role of AI in legal research but emphasized that it does not exempt lawyers from their professional obligations.
“We agree that the use of AI in the preparation of pleadings is a legal research tool that will continue to evolve with advances in technology,” the Utah Court of Appeals said in its statement. “However, we emphasize that every attorney has an ongoing duty to review and ensure the accuracy of their court filings.”
“In the present case, petitioner’s counsel fell short of their gatekeeping responsibilities as members of the Utah State Bar when they submitted a petition that contained fake precedent generated by ChatGPT,” it added.
The brief, jointly filed by Bednar and fellow Utah Attorney Douglas Durbano, was submitted as part of a “timely petition for interlocutory appeal”. However, it was later revealed that Durbano had not been involved in preparing the document. According to the filing, the petition was authored by a law clerk—described as an “unlicensed law clerk” and law school graduate—who was subsequently terminated from the firm.
“It appears that at least some portions of the petition may be AI-generated, including citations and even quotations to at least one case that does not appear to exist in any legal database (and could only be found in ChatGPT),” the respondent’s counsel wrote, as cited by ABC4.
During a hearing in April, Bednar acknowledged the errors, accepted responsibility, and apologized for the incident. He also offered to pay any legal fees resulting from the matter as part of an effort to “make amends”.
As part of the court’s sanctions, Bednar was ordered to:
Pay the respondent’s legal fees associated with the petition and hearing,
Refund fees to his client for time spent preparing the flawed filing,
And donate $1,000 to the Utah-based nonprofit legal aid group And Justice for All.
The case adds to growing scrutiny over the unvetted use of generative AI tools in legal proceedings. It also echoes a similar controversy last year when two New York lawyers were sanctioned for filing a brief with fictitious citations also sourced from ChatGPT.
