Oregon Supreme Court Rejects Filings with AI-Generated Citations

The Oregon Supreme Court has dismissed a petition and struck a response in two separate cases after discovering that legal filings contained fabricated citations and quotes generated by artificial intelligence. These rulings, issued on June 6, 2026, mark the first time the state’s highest court has formally addressed the issue of AI-generated legal falsehoods.

A Growing Burden on the Courts

The misuse of AI tools, such as ChatGPT and Claude, has become an increasing concern for the legal system both in Oregon and across the United States. Experts estimate that more than 1,000 cases nationwide have been impacted by inaccuracies stemming from AI-generated content. These fabrications force the court to expend significant time and resources verifying the validity of legal arguments, which ultimately delays the resolution of other pending cases.
Chief Justice Meagan A. Flynn addressed the impact of these filings in a statement released Friday. While acknowledging that AI might appear to be an efficient tool for legal research, the Chief Justice noted that the court’s time is compromised when it must address non-existent case law. Ankur Doshi, General Counsel of the Oregon State Bar, noted that these fabrications also increase the burden on opposing counsel, potentially driving up legal fees for the other side.

Details of the Recent Rulings

In the first case, the Oregon Supreme Court dismissed a petition for a writ of mandamus after the plaintiffs submitted documents using "LegalAI" that cited non-existent cases and included fake quotes. When the court ordered the plaintiffs to resubmit their paperwork, they filed a declaration less than 12 hours later that included citations to at least four additional cases that do not exist in the Oregon Reports or the Oregon Appellate Reports.
In the second case, the court struck a response to a petition after the respondent submitted a document containing legal arguments that could not be verified in Oregon case law. The court imposed a $500 fine on the respondent and granted them permission to resubmit the document.

The Broader Legal Landscape

The issue of AI-generated misinformation in the courtroom has gained national attention as both lawyers and individuals representing themselves increasingly rely on the technology. Previous instances have resulted in significant financial penalties. In one notable case, lawyers for the chief executive of MyPillow were fined $3,000 in federal court for submitting filings riddled with errors. In Oregon, a lawyer was previously fined $110,000 in district court, representing the highest penalty issued to date for such conduct.
Legal professionals emphasize that individuals often use these tools without realizing that the AI is generating fictitious legal precedents. As the Oregon Supreme Court’s recent actions demonstrate, the judiciary is now taking a firm stance against the submission of unverified and fabricated information in legal proceedings.