Garner v. Kadince, Inc. — per curiam opinion (order to show cause sanctions)

ChatGPT no human verificationfake case citationinapposite citationuse of generative ai by nonlawyer drafter

I. Executive Summary

The court addressed a petition for interlocutory appeal containing fabricated or inapposite authorities, including a hallucinated case that appeared to exist only through ChatGPT. Counsel acknowledged that fabricated authority obtained from ChatGPT was included and accepted responsibility. The court held that fake precedent cannot satisfy counsel’s certification obligations under Utah Rule of Appellate Procedure 40 and imposed sanctions.

II. Conduct Analysis

A petition filed with the court included ChatGPT-generated fabricated authority and miscited or unrelated cases, prepared by an unlicensed law clerk; counsel signed and filed the petition without independently verifying the cited authorities.

III. Legal Foundations

Utah R. App. P. 40(b) Utah R. App. P. 40(c)

IV. Key Facts

1) Respondents identified citations in the petition that were miscited or appeared AI-generated, including a hallucinated case that could only be found via ChatGPT. 2) Counsel acknowledged the petition contained fabricated legal authority obtained from ChatGPT and explained a law clerk used ChatGPT during drafting. 3) The court held an order-to-show-cause hearing and concluded the petition violated Utah Rule of Appellate Procedure 40.

V. Consequences & Sanction

1) The court ordered fee shifting to compensate respondents for work responding to the petition and attending the OSC hearing. 2) The court required counsel to refund the petitioner’s fees related to the petition. 3) The court ordered a $1,000 charitable donation and required proof of payment.